PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Unit – 2

1. Duty to the Court

2. Duty towards the Profession
3. Duty towards the Opponent
4. Duty towards the Client
5. Duty to the Public
 INTRODUCTION TO THE ADVOCATES ACT AND BAR COUNCIL
RULES

The Advocates Act, 1961 is a comprehensive legislation that regulates the legal
profession in India. It defines the term “advocate” and lays down the qualifications,
rights, and duties of an advocate. The Act provides for the creation of the Bar
Council of India (BCI), which is the regulatory body for advocates in India, as well
as the state bar councils.

The Advocates Act, 1961 empowers the bar councils to prescribe the standards of
professional conduct and etiquette for advocates and also empowers them to take
disciplinary action against advocates for professional misconduct.

Bar Council of India Rules, also known as the “Standards of Professional Conduct
and Etiquette” lays down the specific duties and responsibilities of advocates.

Any violation of the ethical duties and professional responsibilities by an advocate

may result in disciplinary proceedings before the Bar Council. The Bar Council of
India has the authority to take disciplinary action against advocates who are found
guilty of professional misconduct. The disciplinary proceedings may include
inquiries, hearings, and imposition of penalties, including suspension or cancellation
of the advocate’s license to practice law.

Advocates are also subject to the jurisdiction of the courts, and the courts have the
authority to take action against advocates for any act of misconduct or breach of
duties during court proceedings. The courts may impose fines, reprimand, or take
other appropriate actions against advocates who violate their ethical duties or
professional responsibilities.
 DUTY TO THE COURT

1. Act in a dignified manner

During the presentation of his case and also while acting before a court, an advocate
should act in a dignified manner. He should at all times conduct himself with self-
respect. However, whenever there is a proper ground for serious complaint against a
judicial officer, the advocate has the right and duty to submit his grievance to proper
authorities.

2. Respect the court

An advocate should always show respect towards the court. An advocate has to bear
in mind that the dignity and respect maintained towards judicial office is essential for
the survival of a free community.

3. Not communicate in private

An advocate should not communicate in private to a judge with regard to any matter
pending before the judge or any other judge. An advocate should not influence the
decision of a court in any matter using illegal or improper means such as coercion,
breach, bribe etc.

4. Refuse to act in an illegal manner towards the opposition

An advocate should refuse to act in an illegal or improper manner towards the

opposing counsel or the opposing parties. He shall also use his best efforts to
restrain and prevent his client from acting in any illegal, improper manner or use
unfair practices in any mater towards the judiciary, opposing counsel or the opposing
parties.

5. Refuse to represent clients who insist on unfair means

An advocate shall refuse to represent any client who insists on using unfair or
improper means. An advocate shall excise his own judgment in such matters. He
shall not blindly follow the instructions of the client. He shall be dignified in use of
his language in correspondence and during arguments in court. He shall not
scandalously damage the reputation of the parties on false grounds during pleadings.
He shall not use unparliamentarily language during arguments in the court.
6. Appear in proper dress code

An advocate should appear in court at all times only in the dress prescribed under
the Bar Council of India Rules and his appearance should always be presentable.

7. Refuse to appear in front of relations

An advocate should not enter appearance, act, plead or practice in any way before a
judicial authority if the sole or any member of the bench is related to the advocate as
father, grandfather, son, grandson, uncle, brother, nephew, first cousin, husband,
wife, mother, daughter, sister, aunt, niece, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law,
brother-in-law daughter-in-law or sister-in-law.

8. Not to wear bands or gowns in public places

An advocate should not wear bands or gowns in public places other than in courts,
except on such ceremonial occasions and at such places as the Bar Council of India
or as the court may prescribe.

9. Not represent establishments of which he is a member

An advocate should not appear in or before any judicial authority, for or against any
establishment if he is a member of the management of the establishment. This rule
does not apply to a member appearing as “amicus curiae” or without a fee on behalf
of the Bar Council, Incorporated Law Society or a Bar Association.

10. Not appear in matters of pecuniary interest

An advocate should not act or plead in any matter in which he has financial interests.
For instance, he should not act in a bankruptcy petition when he is also a creditor of
the bankrupt. He should also not accept a brief from a company of which he is a
Director.

11. Not stand as surety for client

An advocate should not stand as a surety or certify the soundness of a surety that his
client requires for the purpose of any legal proceedings.
 DUTY TOWARDS THE PROFESSION

1. Duty to uphold the dignity and honour of the legal profession

Advocates have a duty to uphold the dignity, honour, and integrity of the legal
profession. Advocates must maintain high standards of professional conduct, ethics,
and morality.

Advocates must not indulge in any conduct that may bring disrepute to the legal
profession or erode public confidence in the legal system. Advocates must also not
engage in any activities that may compromise their independence, impartiality, or
integrity as a legal professional.

2. Duty to promote legal education and professional development

Advocates have a duty to promote legal education and professional development.

Advocates must continuously update their knowledge, skills, and expertise in the
field of law through regular study, research, and training.

Advocates must also share their knowledge and experience with junior advocates
and law students to contribute to the growth and development of the legal
profession. Advocates must actively participate in legal seminars, workshops, and
training programs to enhance their professional competence and stay updated with
the latest legal developments.

3. Duty to maintain professional conduct and etiquette

Advocates have a duty to maintain professional conduct and etiquette in their

interactions with clients, opponents, judges, court staff, and other stakeholders in the
legal system. Advocates must conduct themselves with dignity, courtesy, and respect
towards all parties involved in a case, irrespective of their personal opinions or
differences.

Advocates must also refrain from engaging in any behaviour that may be deemed
unprofessional, unethical, or contemptuous of the court.

4. Duty to avoid misleading or false statements

Advocates have a duty to avoid making misleading or false statements in the course
of their professional practice. Advocates must not make any false, exaggerated, or
misleading claims about their qualifications, experience, or success rates to attract
clients or gain an unfair advantage in a case.

Advocates must also refrain from making any false statements or presenting
fabricated evidence in court, as it undermines the integrity of the legal profession and
the justice system.

5. Duty to respect the authority of the court

Advocates have a duty to respect the authority of the court and uphold the dignity
and integrity of the judicial system. Advocates must not indulge in any behaviour that
may undermine the authority of the court or obstruct the administration of justice.

Advocates must comply with the rules, procedures, and orders of the court, and not
engage in any conduct that may be deemed disrespectful, disobedient, or
contemptuous of the court.
 DUTY TOWARDS THE OPPONENT

1. Not to negotiate directly with opposing party

An advocate shall not in any way communicate or negotiate or call for settlement
upon the subject matter of controversy with any party represented by an advocate
except through the advocate representing the parties.

2. Carry out legitimate promises made

An advocate shall do his best to carry out all legitimate promises made to the
opposite party even though not reduced to writing or enforceable under the rules of
the Court.

Rules on an Advocate's Duty Towards Fellow Advocates

1. Not advertise or solicit work

An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise in any manner. He shall not promote
himself by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal communications, interviews
other than through personal relations, furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments
or producing his photographs to be published in connection with cases in which he
has been engaged or concerned.

2. Sign-board and Name-plate

An advocate's sign-board or name-plate should be of a reasonable size. The sign-

board or name-plate or stationery should not indicate that he is or has been
President or Member of a Bar Council or of any Association or that he has been
associated with any person or organisation or with any particular cause or matter or
that he specialises in any particular type of work or that he has been a Judge or an
Advocate General.

3. Not promote unauthorized practice of law

An advocate shall not permit his professional services or his name to be used for
promoting or starting any unauthorised practice of law.
4. An advocate shall not accept a fee less than the fee which can be taxed under rules
when the client is able to pay more.

5. Consent of fellow advocate to appear

An advocate should not appear in any matter where another advocate has filed a
vakalt or memo for the same party. However, the advocate can take the consent of
the other advocate for appearing.

In case an advocate is not able to present the consent of the advocate who has filed
the matter for the same party, then he should apply to the court for appearance. He
shall in such application mention the reason as to why he could not obtain such
consent. He shall appear only after obtaining the permission of the Court.
 DUTY TOWARDS THE CLIENT

1. Bound to accept briefs

An advocate is bound to accept any brief in the courts or tribunals or before any
other authority in or before which he proposes to practise. He should levy fees
which is at par with the fees collected by fellow advocates of his standing at the Bar
and the nature of the case. Special circumstances may justify his refusal to accept a
particular brief.

2. Not withdraw from service

An advocate should not ordinarily withdraw from serving a client once he has agreed
to serve them. He can withdraw only if he has a sufficient cause and by giving
reasonable and sufficient notice to the client. Upon withdrawal, he shall refund such
part of the fee that has not accrued to the client.

3. Not appear in matters where he himself is a witness

An advocate should not accept a brief or appear in a case in which he himself is a

witness. If he has a reason to believe that in due course of events he will be a witness,
then he should not continue to appear for the client. He should retire from the case
without jeopardising his client's interests.

4. Full and frank disclosure to client

An advocate should, at the commencement of his engagement and during the

continuance thereof, make all such full and frank disclosure to his client relating to
his connection with the parties and any interest in or about the controversy as are
likely to affect his client's judgement in either engaging him or continuing the
engagement.

5. Uphold interest of the client

It shall be the duty of an advocate fearlessly to uphold the interests of his client by all
fair and honourable means. An advocate shall do so without regard to any
unpleasant consequences to himself or any other. He shall defend a person accused
of a crime regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused. An
advocate should always remember that his loyalty is to the law, which requires that
no man should be punished without adequate evidence.
6. Not suppress material or evidence

An advocate appearing for the prosecution of a criminal trial should conduct the
proceedings in a manner that it does not lead to conviction of the innocent. An
advocate shall by no means suppress any material or evidence, which shall prove the
innocence of the accused.

7. Not disclose the communications between client and himself

An advocate should not by any means, directly or indirectly, disclose the

communications made by his client to him. He also shall not disclose the advice
given by him in the proceedings. However, he is liable to disclose if it violates
Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

8. An advocate should not be a party to stir up or instigate litigation.

9. An advocate should not act on the instructions of any person other than his client
or the client's authorised agent.

10. Not charge depending on success of matters

An advocate should not charge for his services depending on the success of the
matter undertaken. He also shall not charge for his services as a percentage of the
amount or property received after the success of the matter.

11. Not receive interest in actionable claim

An advocate should not trade or agree to receive any share or interest in any
actionable claim. Nothing in this rule shall apply to stock, shares and debentures of
government securities, or to any instruments, which are, for the time being, by law or
custom, negotiable or to any mercantile document of title to goods.

12. Not bid or purchase property arising of legal proceeding

An advocate should not by any means bid for, or purchase, either in his own name
or in any other name, for his own benefit or for the benefit of any other person, any
property sold in any legal proceeding in which he was in any way professionally
engaged. However, it does not prevent an advocate from bidding for or purchasing
for his client any property on behalf of the client provided the Advocate is expressly
authorised in writing in this behalf.
13. Not bid or transfer property arising of legal proceeding

An advocate should not by any means bid in court auction or acquire by way of sale,
gift, exchange or any other mode of transfer (either in his own name or in any other
name for his own benefit or for the benefit of any other person), any property which
is the subject matter of any suit, appeal or other proceedings in which he is in any
way professionally engaged.

14. Not adjust fees against personal liability

An advocate should not adjust fee payable to him by his client against his own
personal liability to the client, which does not arise in the course of his employment
as an advocate.

15. An advocate should not misuse or takes advantage of the confidence reposed in
him by his client.

16. Keep proper accounts

An advocate should always keep accounts of the clients' money entrusted to him.
The accounts should show the amounts received from the client or on his behalf.
The account should show along with the expenses incurred for him and the
deductions made on account of fees with respective dates and all other necessary
particulars.

17. Divert money from accounts

An advocate should mention in his accounts whether any monies received by him
from the client are on account of fees or expenses during the course of any
proceeding or opinion. He shall not divert any part of the amounts received for
expenses as fees without written instruction from the client.

18. Intimate the client on amounts

Where any amount is received or given to him on behalf of his client, the advocate
must without any delay intimate the client of the fact of such receipt.

19. Adjust fees after termination of proceedings

An advocate shall after the termination of proceedings, be at liberty to adjust the fees
due to him from the account of the client. The balance in the account can be the
amount paid by the client or an amount that has come in that proceeding. Any
amount left after the deduction of the fees and expenses from the account must be
returned to the client.

20. Provide copy of accounts

An advocate must provide the client with the copy of the client's account maintained
by him on demand, provided that the necessary copying charge is paid.

21. An advocate shall not enter into arrangements whereby funds in his hands are
converted into loans.

22. Not lend money to his client

An advocate shall not lend money to his client for the purpose of any action or legal
proceedings in which he is engaged by such client. An advocate cannot be held guilty
for a breach of this rule, if in the course of a pending suit or proceeding, and without
any arrangement with the client in respect of the same, the advocate feels compelled
by reason of the rule of the Court to make a payment to the Court on account of the
client for the progress of the suit or proceeding.

23. Not appear for opposite parties

An advocate who has advised a party in connection with the institution of a suit,
appeal or other matter or has drawn pleadings, or acted for a party, shall not act,
appear or plead for the opposite party in the same matter.
 DUTY TO THE PUBLIC

1. Duty to promote access to justice

Advocates have a duty to promote access to justice and ensure that justice is
accessible to all, irrespective of their social, economic, or personal background.
Advocates must not refuse legal representation to any person on the grounds of
discrimination, bias, or prejudice.

They must strive to provide legal aid and pro bono services to the indigent and
marginalized sections of society.

2. Duty to promote legal education and awareness

Advocates have a duty to promote legal education and awareness among the general
public. They must strive to educate the public about their legal rights, obligations,
and remedies. Advocates must also contribute to legal research, writing, and
publications to enhance the knowledge and understanding of the law in society.

3. Duty to uphold the rule of law and social justice

Advocates have a duty to uphold the rule of law and promote social justice. They
must use their legal skills and knowledge to prevent and redress any violation of
human rights, injustice, discrimination, or abuse of power.

Advocates must also strive to eradicate corruption and promote transparency,

accountability, and fairness in the legal system.
 UNIT-3

CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1972

I. CONTEMPT OF COURT

Meaning and Nature: It is very difficult to define the concept of ‘contempt of court’.
What would offend the dignity of the court and lower the court’s prestige is a matter
for the court to determine and it cannot be confined within the four walls of a
definition. The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 defined contempt of court for the first
time. There is no statutory definition of contempt of court. Whatever definition is
provided under this act is not a definition but only classification of the term
contempt of court.

Contempt of court in general means, “To offend the dignity of the court and lower
the prestige of the court”.

Oswald defines, contempt to be constituted by any conduct that tends to bring the
authority and administration of Law into disrespect or disregardor to interfere with
or prejudice parties or their witnesses during litigation.

In Halsbury laws of England, it is defined as follow “Any act done or writing

published which is calculated to bring a court or judge into contempt or lower his
authority or to interfere with the due course of justice or the lawful process of the
court is contempt of court”.

As per Corpus Juris Secondum, Contempt of court is disobedience to court by

acting in opposition to the authority, justice and dignity thereof. It signifies a willful
disregard or disobedience of courts order. It also signifies such conduct as tends to
bring the authority of the court and the administration of law into disrespect.

II. CLASSIFICATION:

According to Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, contempt of court
means civil contempt or criminal contempt. Section 2(b) of the Act, defines “Civil
Contempt” as willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or
other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court. Section
2(c) of the Act, defines “Criminal Contempt” as the publication (whether by words
spoken or written or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise) of any
matter or the doing of any act whatsoever which –

i. Scandalizes or tends to scandalize or lower or tends to lower, the authority of

any court, or
ii. Prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any
judicial proceeding; or
iii. Interferes or tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the
administration of justice in any other manner.

The above definition contained in the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, is not
exhaustive. It merely indicates that the contempt may be civil contempt or criminal
contempt. It is thus better to leave it to the court to deal with each case as it comes
and a right of appeal under Section 19 of Section the Contempt of Court Act, 1971,
in all cases of contempt will cure whatever defect there may be in the application of
the law.

There are several instances of the misconduct such as using insulting language
against the judge, suppressing the facts to obtain favorable order, imputation of
partiality and unfairness against the judge. A council who advices his client to
disobey the order of court is also held liable for contempt of court. Attacking the
judiciary in the bar council election is taken as contempt of court. If the council
refuses to answer the question of the court is also liable for contempt of court.

In Re Ajay Kumar Pandey case the Supreme Court held that advocate using
intemperate language against various judicial officers and attributing motives to them
while discharging there judicial function would be held guilty of contempt of court.
In this case such advocate was sentenced or punished to 4 months simple
imprisonment and fine of rupees 1000/-.

Civil Contempt:

The purpose of the proceeding for the civil contempt is not only to punish the
contemner but also to exercise enforcement and obedience to the order of the
Court. In Vidya Sagar v. Third Aditional District Judge, Dehradun, 1991 Cr LJ
2286, it was held that Civil Contempt, actually, serves dual purpose:

(i) Vindication of the public interest by punishment of contemptuous

conduct; and
 (ii) Coercion to compel the contemner to do what the Court requires of him.

To constitute ‘Civil Contempt' the followings are required to be proved:

1. There is disobedience of the order, decree, etc. of the Court or breach of

undertaking given to the Court; and
2. The disobedience or breach is willful.

These requirements may be discussed as follows:

1. Disobedience of the order, decree, etc. of the Court or breach of undertaking

given to the Court: For civil contempt it is necessary that order which has been
disobeyed must have been passed by the Court having jurisdiction to pass order. If
the order has been passed without jurisdiction, it is not binding on the party against
which it has been passed and, therefore, the disobedience of such order will not
amount to contempt of Court.1 Further, the burden to prove that the Court which
has passed the order had no jurisdiction to pass it or the proceeding in which the
undertaking was given was without jurisdiction lies on the person who alleges it.

In Courts on its Own Motion v. N.S. Kumar, 1995 Cr LJ 1261, it was held that
usually the order should be served on the person against whom it has been passed.
However, where it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the person against
whom the order was passed had actual knowledge of the order, he cannot escape
liability for contempt on the ground that the copy of the Order has not been
formally served on him.

Once an order is made by the Court and a person is charged with the allegation of
non-compliance of that order, he cannot plead that he waswaiting for instruction to
comply with the Court's order can possibly contend that he is to seek instructions
from his superiors before he could carry out his obligation of complying with the
Court's order.

The breach of undertaking given to the Court is also taken as contempt, if it is

willful. Where a person is committed for contempt for breach of undertaking, the
undertaking must be given to the Court. The undertaking given by one party to
another is not sufficient for this purpose. An undertaking may be given by the party
himself or by any other person on his behalf provided in the later case the person

1
Sultan Ali Nanghiara v. Nur Hussain, AIR 1949 Lah 131.
giving the undertaking has authority to give such undertaking. Thus, an undertaking
may be given by an advocate on behalf of his client provided he had authority on
behalf of his client to give such undertaking.2

The basis for taking the breach of undertaking as contempt of Court is that the
contemner by making a false representation to the Court obtains a benefit for
himself and if he fails to honour the undertaking, he plays a serious fraud on the
Court itself and thereby obstructs the course of justice and brings into disrepute the
judicial institution.3

In Babu Ram Gupta v. Sudhir Bhasin, Am 1979 se 1528 at 1532, the Supreme
Court has made it clear that the breach of undertaking recorded or forming part of a
compromise decree, would not amount to contempt of Court. The Court has
further observed that there is a clear cut distinction between a compromise arrived at
between the parties or a consent order passed by the Court at the instance of the
parties and a clear and categorical undertaking given by any of the parties. In the
former, if there is violation of the compromise or the order no question of contempt
of Court arises, but the party has a right to enforce the order or the compromise by
their executing the order or getting an injunction from the Court.

Where a compromise is arrived at between the parties and a particular property

having been allotted to A, he has to be put in possession thereof by B. B does not
give possession of this property to A. B cannot be held liable for contempt of court
on the ground that the compromise decree has not been implemented by him. The
remedy of A would be not to pray for drawing up proceedings for contempt of Court
against B but to approach the executing Court for directing a warrant of delivery of
possession under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the
noncompliance of a compromise decree or consent decree is taken as contempt of
Court, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to the execution of the
decree may not be resorted to at all. The reason for treating the breach of
undertaking as contempt of Court is that contemner making a false representation to
the Court obtains a benefit for himself and if he fails to honour the undertaking, he
plays a serious fraud on the Court itself and thereby obstructs the course of justice
and brings into disrepute the judicial institution. In the case of consent, order or a

2
B.K. Rao v. Prithwish Kor, (1989) IT CHN 58 (DB).
3
Babu Ram Gupta v. Sudhir Bhasin, AIR 1979 se 1528 at 1532.
compromise decree the fraud, if any, is practiced by the person concerned not on
the Court but on one of the parties. The offence, thus, committed by the person
concerned is against the party and not against the Court. The very foundation for
proceeding for Contempt of Court, is completely absent in such cases.

In Bhatnagar and Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, Am 1957 se 478 at pp. 481-482, the
court held that the undertaking must be unconditional, unqualified and express.
Where, the party gives the undertaking to the Court on the basis of certain
implications or assumptions which are false to his knowledge, he will be guilty of
misconduct amounting to Contempt of Court.4

What is required to avoid the contempt proceeding is the substantial compliance

with the order of the Court. No court including the Court of contempt is entitled to
take frivolities and trivialities into account while finding fault with the conduct of the
person against whom contempt proceeding is taken. If the order is substantially
complied with, the contempt will not lie.5

2. Willful disobedience or breach: For Civil Contempt the disobedience of the

order, decree, etc. of the Court or breach of undertaking given to the Court must be
willful. In India the Supreme Court6 has, often, pointed out that in order to punish a
person or authority for contempt of Court, the disobedience to any judgment, etc. or
breach of undertaking to the Court must be willful. Thus, mere disobedience of the
order of Court is not sufficient to constitute civil contempt. The disobedience must
be willful. The disobedience must be deliberate and intentional. The contempt
power cannot be used unless the court is satisfied beyond doubt that the person has
deliberately and intentionally violated the order of the court. 7

Whether the disobedience has been wilful, is an issue to be decided by the Court,
taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case.8 In Ram Narang v.
Ramesh Narang,9 the Court has held that the definition of civil contempt given in
section 2(b) creates two categories of cases:

(1) Wilful disobedience to a process of Court; and

4
Dr. (Mrs.) Roshan Sam Joyce v. S.R. Cotton Mills Ltd., AIR 1990 SC 1881.
5
Sukumar Mukhopadhayay v. T.D. Karamchandani, 1995 Cr LT 1610 at p. 1612.
6
J. Vasudevan v. T.R. Dhananjaya, AIR 1996 SC 137.
7
C. Elumalai v. A.G.L. Arudayaraj, AIR 2009 SC 2214.
8
Niaz Mohammad v. State of Haryana, (1994) 6 see 332.
9
AIR 2006 se 1883.
(2) Wilful breach of undertaking given to a Court.

As far as the first category is concerned the word "any" further indicates the wide
nature of the power. No distinction has been statutorily drawn between an order
passed after an adjudication and an order passed by consent. This first category is
separate from the second category. The legislative intention has been to distinguish
between the two and create distinct classes of contumacious behaviour. For
application of category second the undertaking must have been given to the Court
and not to the other party. The Court has made it clear that wilful violation of terms
of consent decree amounts to contempt of Court. For the enforcement of decree or
direction of the court for payment of money, the contempt jurisdiction cannot be
used.10 The Court has made it clear that for the enforcement of such decree or
direction the contempt jurisdiction either under the Contempt of Court Act or
under order 39 Rule 2A of the CPC cannot be used.

Criminal Contempt:

In India the definition of contempt of court is found in clause (c) of Section 2 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It provides that "Criminal Contempt" means the
publication whether by words, spoken or written or by signs, or by visible
representations, or otherwise of any matter of the doing of any act whatsoever which
scandalizes or tends to scandalize or lower or tends to lower the authority of any
court, or prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any
judicial proceedings or interferes or tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to
obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner.

In Delhi Judicial Services Association v. State of Gujarat & others, (1991) 4 SCC
406, the court held that the definition of criminal contempt is wide enough to
include any act of a person which would tend to interfere with the administration of
justice or which would lower the authority of the Court. The scope of the criminal
contempt has been made very wide so as to empower the Court to preserve the
majesty of law which is an indispensable condition, for the rule of law.

In Hira Lal Dixit v. State of U.P., AIR 1954 SC 743, the court held that to constitute
the 'criminal contempt it is not necessary that the publication or other act should
have actually resulted in scandalizing or lowering the authority of the Court or

10
Food Corporation of India v. Sukh Deo Prasad, AIR 2009 se 2331.
interference with the due course of judicial proceeding or administration of justice.
The essence of the offence is that the acts complained of are likely to result in
scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court or interferes with due course of
judicial proceeding or administration of justice. The court further held that the law
of contempt is deterrent in nature and it is concerned, essentially, with the
prevention of scandalization or prejudice or interference with due course of judicial
proceeding or administration of justice rather than merely applying sanctions to
comments or acts which have scandalized or lowered the authority of the Court or
prejudiced or interfered with the due course of judicial proceeding or administration
of justice. Thus, the offence of contempt is complete by mere attempt and does not
depend on actual deflection of justice.11

In re P.C. Sen, Am 1970 SC 1821 the court held that the strict liability rule is
applied in the case of Criminal Contempt. The intention to interfere with the
administration of justice is not necessary to constitute the criminal contempt. The
essence of the offence of contempt lies in the tendency to interfere with the due
course of justice and motive, good faith, etc. of the alleged contemner are
immaterial. It is enough if the action complained of is inherently likely so to
interfere. Mens rea, in the sense of intending to lower the repute of a Judge or
Court, is not an essential ingredient of the criminal contempt. What is material is the
effect of the offending act and not the act per se.

Essential Ingredients of Criminal Contempt: They are:

1. Publication or other act; In the case of Re S.K. Sundarami, AIR 2001 SC 2374,
the telegraphic communication sent by the contemner contain the following: "I call
upon Shriman Dr. A.S. Anand Hon'ble Chief Justice of India to step down from the
constitutional office of the Chief Justice of India forthwith, failing which I will be
constrained to move the criminal court for offences under sections 420, 406, 471,
Indian Penal Code for falsification of your age, without prejudice to the right to file a
writ of quo-warranto against you and for a direction to deposit a sum of Rs. 3 crores
for usurping to the office of Chief Justice of .India even after attaining the age of
superannuation."

The Court held it as gross criminal contempt of court. The contention that sending
such telegram would not amount to publication was not accepted by the court. The
11
In the matter of a letter concerning Suit No. 1947 of 1952, AiR 1959 Oal 17.
Court has held that a telegraphic message can be transmitted only after the sender
gives the content of the message to the telegraphic office which would invariably be
manned by the staff of that office. The message after transmission, reaches the
destination office which also is manned by the members of the staff. From these only
the message would be dispatched to the sender. At all those levels the message is
open to be read by, at least, those who are engaged in the process of transmission. A
telegraph message is not like a letter handwritten by the sender and enveloped in a
sealed cover to be opened only by the sender for reading.

2. Scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court or interfering with judicial

proceeding or administration of justice; It is as much a contempt of Court to say that
the judiciary has lost its independence by reason of something it is alleged to have
done out of Court, as to say that a result of a case it has decided, it is clear that it has
no independence or has lost what it had. Where the article complained of stated: "It
is so unfortunate and regrettable that at the present day the Chief Justice and the
Judges find a peculiar delight in hobnobbing with the executive with the result that
the judiciary is robbed of its independence which at one time attracted the
admiration of the whole country. The old order of things has vanished away." The
Court held that it was a clear case of contempt of Court - re Tushar Kanti Ghosh,
AIR 1935 Cal 419.

In Rajendra Sail v. M.P. High Court Bar Association, 2005 AIR SCW 2443, the
prosecution witness made statement in public that in murder trial the judge had
disposition to acquit the accused. The judge about to retire was available for sale and
that the judgment was rubbish and deserves to be thrown in dustbin. This comment
made by the witness was published in newspaper. The Court held that it amounts to
gross contempt of Court.

In State of Bihar v. Kripalu Shanker, AIR 1987 SC 1554, the Supreme Court has
made it clear that notings made by the officers in the files cannot be made a basis for
contempt action. Such notings are not meant for publication. When the Court
directs the production of the documents, there is implied undertaking that they will
not be used for any other purpose. The production of these documents in ordinary
cases is imposed with a limitation that the side for whose purpose documents are
summoned by the Court cannot use them for any purpose other than the one
relating to the case involved. If the ultimate action does not constitute contempt, the
intermediary suggestions and views expressed in the notings will not amount to
contempt of Court.

In Courts on its Own Motion v. K.K Jha, AIR 2007 Jh. 67, the Supreme Court has
made it clear that writings in pleading or petition the scurrilous allegation or
scandalization against a Judge or Court amount to criminal contempt. Similarly the
court in, M.Y Shareef v. Judges of Nagpur High Court, AIR 1955 se 19, held that
Not only writings in petition or pleadings the scurrilous allegation or scandalization
against a Judge or Court amounts to contempt, but also the allegations made in the
application for the transfer of the case amounts to contempt of Court and the
counsel, who has signed it, may be punished for it.

In U.P. Resi. Emp. Coop. House B. Society v. New Okhala Industrial Development
Authority, 2003 AI.R. S.C.W. 3304, the Supreme Court has held that filing of false
affidavit in the Court is contempt of court.

In S.R. Ramraj v. Special Court, Bombay, AI.R. 2003 S.C. 3039, the Supreme
Court has held that where verification is specific and deliberately false, there is
nothing in law to prevent a person from being proceeded for contempt.

In State v. Sajjan Kumar Sharma, 1986 PLIR (NOC) 34, the court held that
according to Section 6 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 a person shall not be
guilty of contempt of Court in respect of any statement made by him in good faith
concerning the presiding officer of any subordinate Court to-

(a) any other subordinate Court, or

(b) the High Court, to which it is subordinate.

Section 6, thus, enables a person to make bona fide complaint concerning a

subordinate Judge to-

(a) another subordinate Judge who is superior to him; or

(b) the High Court to which he is subordinate.

The protection of section 6 is available only when the complaint is made in good
faith. To satisfy this condition it must be proved that the complainant has acted with
due care and attention.
3. Prejudice to or Interference with, the due course of any judicial proceeding
(Media Trial);

The publication which prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due
course of any judicial proceeding is taken as contempt of Court. Actually, media trial
or trial by newspaper is not considered proper because it affects the fairness of trial
and is likely to cause prejudice to or likely to interfere with, due administration of
justice in the particular case.

Even in England and America and trial by newspaper is considered wrong and taken
as contempt of Court. In A.G. v. Times Newspaper Ltd, Lord Reid has made it
clear that there has been and there still is in England a strong and generally held
feeling that trial by newspaper; is wrong and should be prevented. Thus, whenever
the publication or any other act unduly influences the result of a litigation, it is
treated criminal contempt of Court and is punished there for. The power to punish
the contempt of Court is the means by which the legal system protects itself from the
publication which may unduly influence the result of litigation.

4. Interference or obstruction with administration of justice in any other manner

This clause is a residuary clause and. it covers the cases of the criminal contempt not
expressly covered by sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971. Thus, the publication or doing of any other act which interferes or
tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration of justice
in a manner otherwise than by scandalizing the Court or lowering the authority of the
Court or by causing prejudice or by interfering with due course of any judicial
proceeding would fall within the ambit of this sub-clause and, thus, would amount
criminal contempt under this sub-clause.

In J.R. Parashar v. Prashant Bhushani, AIR 2001 se 3395, the Supreme Court has
held that holding a Dharna by itself may not amount to contempt of court, but if by
holding a dharna access to the courts is hindered and the officers of the court and
members of the police are not allowed free ingress and egress or the proceedings in
court are otherwise disrupted, disturbed or hampered, the Dharna may amount to
contempt because the administration of justice would be obstructed.

An advocate is an officer of the Court and therefore undue interference with the
advocate in the discharge of his professional functions amounts to contempt of
Court. A counsel or legal practitioner is not merely agent of the parties but he is an
officer of the Court. His duty is to inform the Court as to the law and facts of the
case and to aid it do justice by arriving at correct conclusion. Interference with
counsel may amount to contempt of Court. The Court's jurisdiction in contempt is
not exercised out of any mere notion of the dignity of judicial office but is exercised
for the purpose of preventing interference with the due course of justice and it is
quite possible to interfere with the due course of justice by making comments upon
an advocate in the way of his profession. The acts or words complained of may
amount to contempt of Court, if it interferes or tends to interfere with the course of
justice. Thus, casting aspersions on counsel which tends to deter him from
discharging his duties amounts to contempt of Court. Similarly, where a party
threatens the advocate of other party to prosecute him in Court or where a solicitor
assaults the opposing solicitor outside the Court or where a person demands the
counsel not to undertake defence of the accused, it will amount to contempt of
Court - Damayanti G. Chandiramani v. S. Vaney, AIR 1966 Born 19.

Interference with parties was held contempt of court. The court in Aligarh
Municipal Board v. Ekka Tanga Mazdoor Union, AIR 1979 SC 1767, held that
every person is entitled to the redress of his grievances through the assistance of the
Court. It is the main function of the Court to decide the disputes between the
parties. Consequently, any conduct which prevents or tends to prevent a party to
obtain the remedy through the Court amounts to contempt of Court as it interferes
with the course of justice. The parties are protected from undue interference not
only in the Court but also on his way to or from, the Court. Thus, assaulting a party
in the lobby of the Court or sending threatening letter to the party during pendency
of the suit amount to contempt of Court.

In Re A.G.'s Application, AG. v. Butterworth, (1962) 3 All ER 326, the court held
that interference with witnesses is taken very seriously and in certain circumstances, it
may amount to criminal contempt of Court. Witnesses are integral part of the
judicial process and they must have freedom to perform their duties. Interference
with the performance' of their duties is taken as contempt of court.

In Advocate-General Bihar v. Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries, AIR/980 SC 946,

the court held that the abuse of the process of Court calculated to hamper the due
course of a judicial proceeding or the administration of justice amounts to contempt
of Court. The minor abuses of the process of Court may be suitably dealt with
between the parties by taking action under the relevant statutory provisions but a
conduct which abuses and makes a mockery of the judicial process and, thus,
extends its pernicious influence beyond the parties to the action and affects the
interest of the public, it must be taken as contempt of Court.

Constitutional Validity of Contempt of Court

The Indian Constitution gives exclusive power to the Parliament to make laws
regarding matters mentioned in List I and the power to make laws with respect to
subjects in List III is shared by both Parliament and State legislatures. In cases of
conflict, the law made by Parliament prevails. However, Article 254(2) provides an
exception to this rule, stating that a law made by the State legislature may prevail if it
has received the President’s assent and contains provisions not repugnant to existing
laws made by Parliament.

Contempt of court falls under Entry 77 of List I and Entry 14 of List III of the
Constitution’s seventh schedule, which grants the legislature the competence to
legislate on the subject. However, the Supreme Court and High Courts must retain
the power to punish for contempt, and this power cannot be transferred to any other
court.

Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution emphasize the need for effective powers in
the Supreme Court and High Courts to deal with contempt cases. The Parliament’s
power to legislate in this regard must not impede the constitutional provisions’
purpose.

In the case of Noordeen Mohammed v. A.K. Gopalan, the constitutional validity of

contempt of court was challenged. It was held that the Contempt of Courts Act was
valid as it did not contravene the existing law of contempt when enacted. Several
cases have raised concerns over whether the Act satisfies the twin test given in Article
14, which requires that the law be just, fair, reasonable, and not arbitrary, fanciful, or
evasive. Additionally, the classification must satisfy the test, and there must be a
relation (nexus) between the classification and the objective.

The existing law relating to contempt of court is considered reasonable and

therefore does not violate the fundamental right to freedom of speech and
expression guaranteed by Article 19(1) (2) of the Constitution. According to Clause
10 of Article 366, existing law includes any law, ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, or
regulation passed or made before the Constitution’s commencement.

The Contempt of Court Act’s continuity is ensured by Article 255 of the

Constitution, while Section 10 of the Act grants every High Court the power to
exercise jurisdiction, powers, and authority in contempt cases. Thus, it can be
concluded that the Contempt of Court Act is constitutional and valid.

 Punishment:

o The Contempt of Court Act of 1971 punishes the guilty with

imprisonment that may extend to six months or fine of Rs 2,000 or
both.

 It was amended in 2006 to include “truth and good faith” as a

defence.

 It was added that the court may impose punishments only if the
act of the other person substantially interferes, or tends to
interfere with the due course of justice.
 UNIT-V

Accountancy for lawyers:

 Need for maintenance of accounts- Books of accounts that need to be

maintained- Cash Book, journal and ledger
 Elementary aspects of bookkeeping: Meaning, object, journal, double entry
system, closing of accounts
 The cash and bulk transaction- The Cash book- Journal proper especially
with reference to client's accounts- Ledger, Trial balance and final accounts-
Commercial mathematics.
A business enterprise must keep a systematic record of its daily transaction. It is a
legal duty. It helps to know where its stand and adjudge its performance. This
systematic recording of transactions is known as accounting. Since legal profession is
a trade, lawyers are under duty to maintain systematic accounts relating to the
profession.

The basic purpose of accounting is to present a complete financial picture of the

Advocates profession. This can be done with the help of two financial statements
like (i) Profit and loss account and (ii) Balance sheet showing the assests and
liabilities. It is necessary to maintain proper accounts to calculate the following (i)
Annual Income (ii) Income Tax (iii) ProfessionalTax (iv) Amount due to the client
or amount due by the client.

1. To calculate the annual income : To calculate the annual income of the Advocate
from the legal profession, it is necessary to maintain proper accounts of his income
from the profession. Maintaining this account is useful for Advocates also. By
knowing his Annual Income, he can take steps to improve his profession.

2. To Calculate income Tax : Advocates are liable to Pay Income tax for the income
derived from the profession. In order to calculate the amount payable as income tax,
he has to maintain proper accounts relating to his income and expenditure. To
calculate the taxable income he is entitled to deduct certain expenditure like rent,
salary, telephone bill and other administrative expenditure. For this purpose also he
has to maintain proper accounts.

3. To calculate professional tax: Every six months the advocates are liable to pay
professional tax to the Government. The amount of professional tax varies
depending on the income. In order to calculate the amount of professional tax he
has to maintain the proper accounts.

4. To Ascertain the amount due from the client or due to the client: The account
relating to the amount received from the client and the amount received on behalf of
the client from others or from the court should be properly maintained. Then only
the amount due from the client can be calculated. This will help not only the client
but also the Advocate.
PLACE OF KEEPING THE ACCOUNTS BOOKS.

The accounts books and documents relating to the accounts should be kept and
maintained by the advocate,

(i) At his office.

(ii) Where he is carrying on the profession more than one office, then at his head
office. But accounts can also be maintained separately for each branch at the
respective branch office. Penalty for not keeping Account Books: A Lawyer who is
legally liable to maintain account books, fails to maintain it or fails to retain it for the
prescribed period (cash book and ledger-16 years, other books-8 years) is liable to
pay penalty ranging from Rs.2000/- to 1,00,000/- (S.271 A ).

Bar council Rules relating to accounting

Accounting is an art of recording, classifying and summarizing in a significant

manner the event which are financial in character and interpreting the result there of.
An Advocate is under a duty to maintain proper accounts of money received from
his client and the amount received on behalf of client from others or from the court.
The rules relating to such accounting is dealt in rules 25 to 32 of the Bar Council Of
India Rules 1975.

Rule 25: An advocate should keep the accounts of the client’s money entrusted to
him. The accounts should show the amounts received from the client, the expenses
incurred for him and the debits made on the account of Advocate fees with the
respective dates and all other necessary particulars.

Rule 26: Where moneys are received from the client, it should be entered whether
the amount have been received for the advocates fees or expenses. Amount received
for the expenses shall not be diverted towards Advocates fees without the consent of
the client in writing.

Rule 27: Where any amount is received on behalf of his client the fact of such
receipt must be intimated to the client as early as possible.

Rule 28 : After the completion of the proceeding, the advocate shall be at the liberty
to take the settled fee due to hi to the unspent money in his hand.
Rule 29: Where the fee has been left unsettled, the advocate shall take the fees
which he is legally entitled from the moneys of the client remaining in his hands,
after the completion of the proceeding. The balance shall be returned to the client.

Rule 30: A copy of the client account shall be furnished to him after getting the
necessary copying charges from him.

Rule 31: An advocate shall not make any agreements whereby client’s funds in his
hands are converted into loans to the advocate.

Rule 32: An Advocate shall not lend money to his client for the purpose of
conducting the case

Rules Relating to Accounting Under Income Tax Act.

Under the Income Tax Act, every lawyer is required to maintain the following books
of accounts and other documents to enable the Assessing Officer to calculate his
total income (i) cash book (ii) Receipt Voucher (iii) payment voucher (iv) journal (v)
ledger. The accounting year is 1st April to 31st March next year.

1. Cash book : It is the book in which the amount received by the Advocates from
the clients and others and the amount spent for the clients are written. This book is
useful for the Advocate to know the amount in his hand on each day.

2. Receipt Voucher : It is the document prepared for recording the receipt of money
by cash or cheque. When an Advocate received money from the client, the
Advocate has to issue a receipt to the client. Advocate shall maintain receipt books
with serially numbered receipt forms in duplicate. The original receipt should be
given to the client and the duplicate shall be retained by the Advocate.

3. Payment Voucher : Payment vouchers are used to record such payments for
which receipts are not obtainable from the person to whom such payments are
made. For example bus fare, auto fare, court fees, stamps, refreshment expenses etc.
In such cases the Advocate signature in the payment voucher and the signature of
the person to whom payment is made may be obtained.

4. Journal : Journal is the book of first entry or original entry. In the journal the
transactions are recorded in the order of their occurrence. It should contain the
following details (i) Date of Transactions (ii) Account to which the transaction relates
(iii) Amount to be debited, (iv) Amount to be credited (v) Explanation of the
transaction.

5. Ledger : The transactions recorded in the journal are to be posted to the separate
heads of account in other book called as Ledger. In the ledger different pages are
allotted to the different heads of accounts. When the journal entries are posted to
the concerned heads of account in the ledger, the page number of the ledger should
be noted in the journal for easy reference.The ledger account of an advocate shall
contain the following heads.

Clients Account :

For each and every client separate pages shall be allotted in this ledger and separate
account shall be maintained for them.

(i) Fees Account : In this account the fees received from each and every client shall
be entered separately. From this account the total amount of fees received from all
the clients in a financial year can be ascertained.

(ii) Rent Account.

(iii) Salary Account.

(iv) Library Account.

(v) Printing and Stationary Account.

(vi) Postage and Telegram Account.

(vii) Electricity Charges.

(viii) Conveyance Charges.

(ix) Repair and Maintenance.

(x) Office Miscellaneous Expenses Account.

At the beginning of the ledger book the index may be given with the name of the
different heads of account and their respective pages for easy reference.
Case Laws:

Manilal Kher Ambalal And Co. vs A.G. Lulla, Seventh Income-Tax ..1989 176 ITR
253 Bom

Facts of the case:

The Petition is files advocates who are solicitor and advocates enrolled more than 50
years age and has been filing accounts every year with in the rules framed by High
court, Bombay with related to their professional work.Petitioner were maintain
separate accounts in the banks as per rule 10 of the Bombay High court. When an
IT Officer sent the advocates notice furnish the details as per new rules against the
method followed by advocates from several years. Advocate preferred this appeal
against the change of accounting system.

Issues of the case:

When an advocate is accountable for money received from client towards case and
is that of a quasi trust and he holds such money in a fiduciary capacity?

whether the change the accounting system for an advocate can be entitled by IT
officer with out proper amendment?

Judgment:

The Bombay High Court ruled that the High Court Rules are unquestionably
created in conformity with professional standards and cannot be held accountable.
As a result, the petition was approved, and the respondent was required to cover the
petitioners’ costs.

2. Associated Law Advisers Antriksh Bhawan v/s ITO Ward I.T.A. No. 5336 &
5846/DEL of 2014

Facts of the Case:

The aforesaid cross appeal have been filed by the Assess as well as the revenue
against the impugned order dated 22/8/ 2014 past by under section 143 ( 3) for the
assessment year 2010-11
Issues

weather a law firm can treat advance payment received for the payment to senior
advocate and for the payment to its own partners in similar manner?

Can an advocate receive money as an address advance in his judiciary capacity?

Judgment:

Once the case has been determined, the advocate may accept the funds in his official
capacity as a judge and may treat them solely as advances rather than as profits. The
Revenue of Appeal is dismissed, and the Assessor’s Appeal is upheld.

3. Income Tax officer And Anr vs Sudesh Sharma CRM No A-959 of 2014

Facts of the Case:

The special leave petition was filed by appellant against by the acquittal of
respondent from case where, respondent acting as Council service clients in many
cases submitted the requiste documents and TDS Certificate for the purpose of
furnishing clients income tax returns, which were not genuine and also the returns
work client wrongly.

Issues:

Weather in advocate maybe held liable for submission of wrong income tax returns
showing name of non existing persons in order to derive pecuniary benefits in the
shape of refund or it was?

such filing can be considered as the harmful to public servant?

Judgment:

The motion for leave to appeal was denied by the court, which determined that
there was insufficient evidence, even if it were cogent, to support any interference
with the appealed acquittal judgements. As a result, this petition was dismissed
because it lacked merit.
4 .S.S. Industries Vs Union of India Special civil application no 8841/2000

Facts of the Case:

The person chargeable with law makes an interest and the subsection 8 of Sec.73 of
the case maybe tax interested and penalty

Issues:

Whether the interpretations of Rules 86a of the CGST rules inserted vide
notifications number 75 /2019 procedure for power and blocking the input tax credit
in the electronic credit ledger is true or not?

Whether the scope of exercise of power and the Rule 86 a of IT rule is valid or not?

Judgment:

Hear in this case both by the appellant petitions were rejected and failed with
appropriate observations.

5. Commissioner of income tax Vs Tanu Bai D. Desai 1972 ITR 713 Bom

Facts of the Case:

The assessee is a practicing solicitor and in the course of caring his profession used
to deposit money in a separated bank account, received by his clients. The income
tax officer and the appellant assistant commissioner held that the interest earned by
advocate on fixed deposits earn out of money paid by client should be should be
considered as and should be included in the personal assessment of the assessee
aggrieved by the tribunal appellant preferred this petition before the High Court.

Issues

Weather in advocate interest earned as a practice in solicitor by him and a section 66

(1) of the income Tax Act

In the clients accounts are included in the computation of total income in his
personal assessment or not?

Judgment: After thoroughly discussing the law high Court held that tribunal
judgement is correct and high Court held that interest earned by an advocate of fixed
deposit maintained in client account need not be considered is that assessment of an
advocate personal account.

6. Commissioner of Income tax Sundersons and AIR 1969 cal 211 ITA 453

Fats of the Case:

The petitioner was filed by the appellant under section 66 ( 1) of the Income Tax
Act rules on interesting question about solicitor clients relationship

Isssued:

Weather the unclaimed balance in the accounts of the client are credited to the
profit and loss account of the law firm or an advocate can be considered as revenue
receipts?

Weather search amounts are taxable under the Income Tax Act?

Judgment:

Since the solicitor did not stand in the position of the trustee to the client and
limitation Act.the remedy of the client to recover sum of the balance where where
the limitations. Amount of such wages could not be added to income of solicitor

7. Shiv ram das Vs B.V Nerurkar (1937) Bom LR 633

Facts of the case

This is a chamber of s taken summons taken out by the applicants, who are a firms
at solicitors against the respondents Who wear the defendant in the suit in the matter
of costs incurred by them depending the suit on behalf of the desfendants. respond
in contended that before the tax in master that the applicants are not entitled to any
profit cost but only to pay their out of pocket.

Issues:

Whether implied or constructive Trustee of a public Charity trust are entitled only
to their out of pockets costs of the suit and their offices expenses or else to their
profit costs?
Judgment:

Coat held that the appealents are entitled to the costs of their appearance before the
taxing master on the taxation of their bills of costs and on the hearing of the
objections filed they their quote the petition was allowed

8. VFD and Sopher Vs Waglf & Co (1925) 27 Bom

Facts of the case

In this case the plaintiff ask for the payment to them of the amount at a degree
obtained by the defendant R.P Wagle & co against one narotonda attached in
executions of the decree in favor of lied sopher in the suit and relised by shering.

Issues:

Whether the priority should be given to the solicitor or a judgment creditor in credit
to the lien on judgment?

Judgment:

Court held that the ” All cause should come out of the money is first court decided
that applicant or solicitor should be the first priority in lien on judgement Council
certified.

9. Dharnraj Giriji Narsingioji Vs. Dayne and Co (1933) 35 Boml 554 ,145, Ind 641

Facts of the case

This is an appeal from an order made by Justice mirzaa or motion taken out by the
attorney for the defendant in a Suit against merits to the company who were
solicitors for the notice ask that masseive be ordered to pay defendant costs which
defendants cause of their suit less certain cost which the defendant head already
been directed to bear.

Issues:

where the solicited his personally liable for the costs to the opposing party?

Judgment: In this case Appeal allowed with cost of the notice motions and appeal.
Court held that notice of motions absolutes . Costs to be taxed as if the plaintiff
exists.
10. Haji Ismail And Co Vs Rabiabaz & Another

Fact s of the case:

The two diffent in this suit where partners number 96 of 1907 title by the first
defendant against the second descendant to dissolution of partnership receiver was
appointed to get in the assets.

The plaintiff in this suit having obtained degree a against the defendant were granted
leave to issue executions against the assets of the partnership in the hands of the
receiver and prohibitorary order was issue on the 19 June 1908 they have taken out
a garmishree of notice against the receiver to pay to the plaintiff money.

Issues:

whether a solicitor is entitle to a lean for his costs in property recovered or preserved
by his exertions.

Judgment:

petition is allowed by the Court and held that plaintiff a charge or the money.