B.K.MUKHERJEE, GHULAM HASAN, S.R.DASS, VIVIAN BOSE
President Of India – Appellant
Versus
M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-general Of India – Respondent
Judgment
BOSE, J.: This matter arises out of a summons issued to Mr. G, a Senior Advocate of this Court, under Order IV, Rule 30, of the SC Rules, to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him.
2. Mr. G was called to the Bar in England and was later enrolled as an Advocate of the Bombay High Court. He is also an Advocate of this Court. On 20-12-1952 he entered into an agreement with a client whereby the client undertook to pay him 50 per cent, of any recoveries he might make in the legal proceedings in respect of which he was engaged. On this being reported to the High Court the matter was referred to the Bombay Bar Council and was investigated by three of its members under section 11 (1) of the Bar Council Act. They recorded their opinion that this amounted to professional misconduct.
The High Court agreed and suspended Mr. G from practice as an Advocate of the Bombay High Court for six months. The learned Judges considered that they had no power to affect his position as an Advocate of this Court, so directed that a copy of their judgment be submitted to this Court to enable this Court to take such action on it as it thought fit. Acting on this report this Co
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.