Section 35 of the Advocates Act for misconduct of an Advocate = the Civil Court is not competent to take any disciplinary action under Section 35 of the Advocates Act for misconduct of an Advocate.
| CRP 591 / 2013 | CRPSR 35761 / 2012 |
|
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.591 of 2013
ORDER:
This revision invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is fundamentally misconceived.
The revision petitioner is appearing as a party-in-person.
O.S.No.13 of 2000 was filed by the first respondent herein for recovery of the suit amount from the petitioner herein and other respondents, the petitioner herein being the third defendant in the suit.
The petitioner filed I.A.No.709 of 2012 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 35 of the Advocates Act, against respondents 1 to 3 herein to declare the Advocate appearing on behalf of the first respondent/plaintiff - Sri G.L.V Ramana Murthy as unqualified to proceed in the matter, alleging that the said Advocate was having beneficiary dealings and monetary transactions with the plaintiff; that he was penalized by imposition of a fine of Rs.750/- in the Guntur District Consumer Forum in C.D.667/93 which was confirmed by Appellate Court.
The Court below rightly rejected the application on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain an application to interdict a counsel who is continuing on the rolls of the Bar Council, from pursuing his professional obligations and held that
the Civil Court is not competent to take any disciplinary action under Section 35 of the Advocates Act for misconduct of an Advocate.
This Court concurs. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
Date: 15.02.2013
va
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.591 of 2013
Date: 15.02.2013
va
Comments
Post a Comment