web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: Accused Have Right To Change Advocate

Ashem Shyamkesho Singh Vs Thokchom Ranjan Meetei on 08 Jul 2016

Posted on March 11, 2021 by ShadesOfKnife

Single Judge bench of Manipur High Court held as follows:

From Para 4,

[4] Although it is nowhere mentioned in the application that the same has been filed under the provisions of CPC, it is the provisions of Order 3 Rule 4(2) of CPC which provide that appointment of an Advocate shall be filed in the court and shall be deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the court by a writing signed by the client or the Advocate as the case may be. An Advocate does not only represent his client but he is also an officer of the court. In any matter in which he is engaged, he has to assist the court till his vakalatnama is determined in accordance with law.

From Para 6,

The normal conduct of a client is that if he wishes to change his counsel for some reason or the other, he should approach him for return of the brief and to obtain “No Objection” from him. In case his counsel returns the brief, it is well and good and if he refuses to return the brief or refuses to give “No Objection”, the client may invoke the provisions of Order 3 Rule 4 of the CPC to redress his grievances. However, in the present case, the applicants have failed to that and without determining the appointment of their earlier counsel, Shri Ng. Kumar, Advocate, they had moved an application for deleting their names from the array of parties in the writ petition through another Advocate which is unfair and unreasonable on the part of the applicants. The moment an Advocate is engaged, a client is expected to be fair and reasonable to him and ought to give proper instructions accordingly. But in any case and for whatever reasons, the applicants have expressed their view that they don’t want Shri Ng. Kumar, Advocate to continue as their counsel and that a new Advocate be engaged in his place and since the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said R.D. Saxena’s Case (supra) has categorically observed that for whatever reason, if a client does not want to continue the engagement of a particular Advocate, it would be a professional requirement consistent with the dignity of the profession that he would return the brief to the client and it is time to hold that such obligation is not only a legal duty but a moral imperative, this court is of the view that this application is liable to be allowed. In view of the above observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is the duty of Shri Ng. Kumar, Advocate to give “No Objection” so that the applicants could engage a new Advocate of their choice. If Shri Ng. Kumar, Advocate is of the view that the action of the applicants being unfair and unreasonable, has caused prejudice to his professional right and privilege as a counsel, it is open to him to seek appropriate relief and redress his grievance from an appropriate forum.

Ashem Shyamkesho Singh Vs Thokchom Ranjan Meetei on 08 Jul 2016
Posted in High Court of Manipur Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision Accused Have Right To Change Advocate Advocate Antics Bar Council of India Rules Part IV Chapter-II Rule 39 CPC Order 3 Rule 4 - Appointment of Pleader Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes R.D. Saxena Vs Balram Prasad Sharma | Leave a comment

Change the Advocate

Posted on January 21, 2021 by ShadesOfKnife

Here are few case laws to support your effort in changing an advocate who is already on record of a Court in your cases.

 

  1. R.D. Saxena Vs Balram Prasad Sharma on 22 August, 2000
  2. New India Assurance Co Ltd Vs A.K.Saxena on 7 Nov 2003 [SC]
  3. C.V. Sudhindra and Ors. Vs Divine Light School For Blind [KarHC]
  4. Karnataka Power Distribution Vs M RajaShekar on 2 Dec 2016 [NOC not required to engage new advocate, if the advocate was discharged by client, following the procedure established by law]
  5. Bhagya and Ors Vs Jayalakshmi and Ors on 13 Feb 2019 [Only after the advocate was discharged by client, following the due procedure established by law, a client can engage a new advocate]
Posted in Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications | Tagged Accused Have Right To Change Advocate Advocate Doesnot Have Lien Advocates Act Section 32 Need 'No Objection Certificate (NOC)' From Advocate Before Engaging new Advocate No Need Of No Objection Certificate (NOC) From Advocate Summary Post | Leave a comment

K.R Chitra Vs Supreme Court Legal Services Committee on 30 September, 2015

Posted on June 25, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

High Court of Delhi has given this judgment, where in a advocate was not selected for Supreme Court Legal Services Committee and she filed this interesting case.

K.R Chitra Vs Supreme Court Legal Services Committee on 30 September, 2015

 

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Accused Have Right To Change Advocate K.R Chitra Vs Supreme Court Legal Services Committee | Leave a comment

C.V. Sudhindra and Ors. Vs Divine Light School For Blind on 21 July, 2008

Posted on June 25, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Another awesome judgment from Karnataka reiterating that when a client loses confidence and faith in his Advocate he can choose to terminate the vakalathnama and seek for return of the case file.

Be that as it may, neither the trial Court in the present suit nor this Court in this petition would be required to go into the correctness or otherwise of the said allegations and counter allegations except to reckon the same to notice that the Advocates on record and their clients have been trading charges against each other, which alone is sufficient for a client to loose confidence and faith in the Advocate so as to choose to terminate the vakalathnama and seek for return of the file. The very fact that the Advocate is clinging on to the file without initiating any other action which would have been open to them in law, if in fact the Trustees had acted contrary to the interest of the Trust would indicate that the contentions put forth before the trial Court was not bonafide, at least in so far as claiming a right to remain on record as saviours of the first respondent when the first respondent has been in existence from the year 1958 as indicated from their letterhead and have taken care of themselves.

Honourable Profession… hmmm

In fact as and when any such unfortunate situation arises, the learned Advocate who has been appearing for such a client, should on his own free will come forward to advise the client to take back the file and should express lack of interest to appear on their behalf. That is why, this profession is known as honourable profession.

C.V. Sudhindra and Ors. Vs Divine Light School For Blind on 21 July, 2008
Posted in High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Accused Have Right To Change Advocate Advocate Antics C.V. Sudhindra and Ors. Vs Divine Light School For Blind No Need Of No Objection Certificate (NOC) From Advocate Sandeep Pamarati | Leave a comment

R.D. Saxena Vs Balram Prasad Sharma on 22 August, 2000

Posted on June 25, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is a wonderful judgment from Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on two aspects

(a) Has the advocate a lien for his fees on the litigation papers entrusted to him by his client?

(b) Does the client has freedom to choose and engage a advocate and change the advocate?

Thus, even after providing a right for an advocate to deduct the fees out of any money of the client remaining in his hand at the termination of the proceeding for which the advocate was engaged, it is important to notice that no lien is provided on the litigation files kept with him. In the conditions prevailing in India with lots of illiterate people among the litigant public it may not be advisable also to permit the counsel to retain the case bundle for the fees claimed by him. Any such lien if permitted would become susceptible to great abuses and exploitation.

… and more…

A litigant must have the freedom to change his advocate when he feels that the advocate engaged by him is not capable of espousing his cause efficiently or that his conduct is prejudicial to the interest involved in the lis, or for any other reason. For whatever reason, if a client does not want to continue the engagement of a particular advocate it would be a professional requirement consistent with the dignity of the profession that he should return the brief to the client. It is time to hold that such obligation is not only a legal duty but a moral imperative.

In criminal cases, every person accused of an offence has the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice which is now made a fundamental right under Article 22(1) of the Constitution. The said right is absolute in itself and it does not depend on other laws. In this context reference can be made to the decision of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Shobharam and ors. (AIR 1966 SC 1910). The words of his choice in Article 22(1) indicate that the right of the accused to change an advocate whom he once engaged in the same case, cannot be whittled down by that advocate by withholding the case bundle on the premise that he has to get the fees for the services already rendered to the client.

If a party terminates the engagement of an advocate before the culmination of the proceedings that party must have the entire file with him to engage another advocate.

R.D. Saxena Vs Balram Prasad Sharma on 22 August, 2000

Citations : [2000 AIR SC 3049], [2001 ALLMR CRI SC 375], [2000 ALT SC 5 1], [2001 BLJR 1 174], [2000 CTC 3 757], [2001 GLH 3 624], [2000 JT SC 9 432], [2000 KLT SC 3 438], [2001 LW 1 284], [2001 MHLJ SC 1 23], [2000 MPLJ SC 613], [2000 PLJR 4 161], [2000 RD 91 692], [2000 SCALE 6 42], [2000 SCC 7 264], [2000 SUPP SCR 2 598], [2001 UJ 1 27], [2000 UPLBEC 3 2404], [2000 AIR SC 2912], [2000 CTR 163 32]

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/151656/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ad8de4b0149711411a9d

https://www.indianemployees.com/judgments/details/r-d-saxena-vs-balram-prasad-sharma

http://www.briefcased.in/r-d-saxena-vs-balram-prasad-sharma/

https://www.legalauthority.in/judgement/r-d-saxena-vs-balram-prasad-sharma-22160


Karnataka High Court Judgments:

  • NOC not required
Karnataka Power Distribution Vs M RajaShekar on 2 Dec 2016
  • NOC required:
Bhagya Vs Jayalakshmi on 13 Feb 2019
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Accused Have Right To Change Advocate Advocate Antics Advocate Doesnot Have Lien Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes R.D. Saxena Vs Balram Prasad Sharma Reportable Judgement or Order Sandeep Pamarati | Leave a comment

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal Twitter Timeline

Tweets by @SandeepPamarati

My MRA Twitter Timeline

Tweets by @Shadesofknife

Recent Posts

  • P Amutha Vs Gunsekaran on 23 Dec 2022 December 1, 2023
  • Ashokbhai Devsingbhai Chauhan Vs Taraben Ashokbhai Chauhan on 11 Nov 2019 December 1, 2023
  • Bhagwant Narnawre Vs Radhika Narnawre on 05 Apr 2019 December 1, 2023
  • Sanjay Bhalkar Vs State of Maharashtra on 13 Jan 2020 November 27, 2023
  • Omprakash Sahni Vs Jai Shankar Chaudhary and Anr on 02 May 2023 November 26, 2023

Most Read Posts

  • Sindhu Janak Nagargoje Vs The State of Maharashtra and Ors on 08 Aug 2023 (4,396 views)
  • Swapan Kumar Das Vs State of West Bengal on 21 Aug 2023 (1,966 views)
  • Dhananjay Mohan Zombade Vs Prachi Dhananjay Zombade on 18 Jul 2023 (1,869 views)
  • Rajan and Anr Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr on 17 Aug 2023 (1,793 views)
  • Sana Nitish Kumar Reddy Vs State of Telangana on 26 April 2023 (1,758 views)
  • Shilpashree J.M. Vs Gurumanjunatha .A.S. on 19 Jun 2023 (1,725 views)
  • Kantharaju Vs State of Karnataka on 17 Jul 2023 (1,449 views)
  • Anshu Gupta Vs Adwait Anand on 09 Aug 2023 (1,174 views)
  • Asfaq Alam Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr on 31 Jul 2023 (952 views)
  • Niharika Kundu Vs Shankar Ghosh on 12 Sep 2023 (880 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (360)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (347)Landmark Case (334)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (300)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (234)Work-In-Progress Article (216)1-Judge Bench Decision (196)Sandeep Pamarati (91)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (88)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (75)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (58)Perjury Under 340 CrPC (53)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (52)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (41)Not Authentic copy hence to be replaced (38)CrPC 482 - Quash (38)HM Act 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (35)Advocate Antics (35)PWDV Act 20 - Maintenance Granted (33)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (664)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (300)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (162)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (120)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (96)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (73)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (59)General Study Material (55)Prakasam DV Cases (46)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (46)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (46)LLB Study Material (45)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (43)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (42)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (42)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (31)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (27)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (20)High Court of Patna Judgment or Order or Notification (17)

Recent Comments

  • ShadesOfKnife on Online RTI Portal for State of Andhra Pradesh
  • A. GIRI KUMAR, National Resource person To act on Online RTI Portal for State of Andhra Pradesh
  • Akif on Lifecycle Stages of a Maintenance Case under Section 125 CrPC
  • ShadesOfKnife on Vipul Lakhanpal Vs Pooja Sharma on 01 June 2015
  • Adv. Dipankar Saha on Vipul Lakhanpal Vs Pooja Sharma on 01 June 2015

Archives of SoK

  • December 2023 (3)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (19)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • HKG (Hong Kong) on 2023-12-13 December 13, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Dec 13, 19:00 - 23:00 UTCNov 29, 09:40 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in HKG (Hong Kong) datacenter on 2023-12-13 between 19:00 and 23:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for […]
  • BKK (Bangkok) on 2023-12-12 December 12, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Dec 12, 17:00 - 23:00 UTCDec 1, 13:41 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in BKK (Bangkok) datacenter on 2023-12-12 between 17:00 and 23:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for end-users […]
  • HKG (Hong Kong) on 2023-12-11 December 11, 2023
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Dec 11, 19:00 - 23:00 UTCNov 29, 09:20 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in HKG (Hong Kong) datacenter on 2023-12-11 between 19:00 and 23:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for […]

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 45.141.148.149 | S November 30, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 1,030 | First: 2023-09-21 | Last: 2023-11-30
  • 193.169.194.170 | SD November 30, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 3,801 | First: 2023-11-05 | Last: 2023-11-30
  • 91.238.105.130 | SDW November 30, 2023
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 3,246 | First: 2023-05-12 | Last: 2023-11-30
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 831 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel