Karnataka HC has held that that counsel on record cannot become an agent of the party after retiring from the case by leave of the Court for prosecuting the suit proceedings.
Justice Krishna S Dixit observed the same while restraining advocate Siraj Ahmed from participating in court proceedings as agent or counsel of the party in the present case.
The petitioner, one A Ashraf Ali, a tenant of the Respondent landlady, B S Susheela Devi, had moved to the Court challenging by the aggrieving situation of appointment of Ahmed stating “the advocate appearing for the respondent – landlady having retired from the case was appointed as an attorney/agent by her to act on her behalf and to conduct the proceedings in these suits.”
The Court while upholding the contention put forth by the petitioner relied upon decision of Bombay High Court in ONGC Vs. Offshore Enterprises, AIR 1993 BOMBAY 217 which held
“Advocates in their professional capacity are enjoined to act with complete impartiality and detachment and not entitled to identify themselves with the clients or the cause personally. The paramount duty of an advocate is to assist the Court in its task of administering justice- - - advocates belong to noble profession of law. On the other hand, a constituted attorney is entitled to identify himself with the donor of power of attorney and act in the same manner as the suitor litigant is entitled to act. An advocate is governed not merely by written provisions of the Advocates, Act 1961 but also by traditions of Bar built up for generation during the course of administration of justice for centuries.”
86540
103860
630
114
59824
