Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: a Pleader

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 17, 1944
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/783090

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Decided On
Subject
civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: a Pleader

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1944Mad244

Excerpt

- leach, c.j.1. the respondent is a pleader practising at palni. rule. 11 of the rules framed under the legal practitioners' act requires that an application for renewal of a certificate must be made through the judge presiding over the court in which the pleader ordinarily practises and unless the high court or the registrar otherwise orders should be made not later than 15th november. if the application for renewal is made by that date the practice has been to allow the pleader to appear in cases pending the issue to him of the sanad. in this case the respondent did not apply for the renewal of his sanad in respect of the year 1943 until 31st december 1942 and on 15th january 1943, before the sanad had been renewed, he filed a memorandum of appearance in a case before the sub-magistrate of palni. the certificate was subsequently issued and in accordance with the practice was dated 1st january 1943.2. as the pleader had not complied with rule 11 he had no right to appear in a case until his sanad had actually been renewed and in these circumstances this court directed that proceedings be instituted against the respondent. in accordance with this order the sub-magistrate instituted proceedings and after he had heard what the pleader had to say, directed the matter to be dropped. his reason for adopting this course was that he was under the impression that the high court had condoned the delay on the part of the pleader in applying for the renewal of his sanad. this was not the case. it is obvious that in appearing on 15th january 1943 in the case before the sub-magistrate, he rendered himself liable to punishment under section 32, legal practitioners' act. the respondent is a pleader of 27 years standing and his conduct hitherto has given no cause for complaint. an apology has been made on his behalf and in these circumstances we will not inflict a fine. the respondent is, however, censured for his conduct.

Full Judgment

Leach, C.J.

1. The respondent is a pleader practising at Palni. Rule. 11 of the rules framed under the Legal Practitioners' Act requires that an application for renewal of a certificate must be made through the Judge presiding over the Court in which the pleader ordinarily practises and unless the High Court or the Registrar otherwise orders should be made not later than 15th November. If the application for renewal is made by that date the practice has been to allow the pleader to appear in cases pending the issue to him of the sanad. In this case the respondent did not apply for the renewal of his sanad in respect of the year 1943 until 31st December 1942 and on 15th January 1943, before the sanad had been renewed, he filed a memorandum of appearance in a case before the Sub-Magistrate of Palni. The certificate was subsequently issued and in accordance with the practice was dated 1st January 1943.

2. As the pleader had not complied with Rule 11 he had no right to appear in a case until his sanad had actually been renewed and in these circumstances this Court directed that proceedings be instituted against the respondent. In accordance with this order the Sub-Magistrate instituted proceedings and after he had heard what the pleader had to say, directed the matter to be dropped. His reason for adopting this course was that he was under the impression that the High Court had condoned the delay on the part of the pleader in applying for the renewal of his sanad. This was not the case. It is obvious that in appearing on 15th January 1943 in the case before the Sub-Magistrate, he rendered himself liable to punishment under Section 32, Legal Practitioners' Act. The respondent is a pleader of 27 years standing and his conduct hitherto has given no cause for complaint. An apology has been made on his behalf and in these circumstances we will not inflict a fine. The respondent is, however, censured for his conduct.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial