ORDER

1. ON 29-8-2005 WHEN THIS MATTER WAS PLACED BEFORE US FOR ADMISSION, WE FOUND THAT THERE WAS A LETTER DATED 27-8-2005 CIRCULATED BY THE ADVOCATE ON-RECORD FOR THE PETITIONERS MR VISHWAJIT SINGH, STATING THAT COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS MR S.D. SINGH WAS DOWN WITH VIRAL FEVER AND WAS, THEREFORE, UNABLE TO ATTEND THE COURT. ON THIS GROUND TWO WEEKS ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT FOR. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED OUT, COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE RESPONDENT STATED BEFORE US THAT THE FACTS STATED IN THE LETTER ARE NOT TRUE AND THAT THAT VERY MORNING MR S.D. SINGH HAD APPEARED AGAINST HIM IN A MATTER BEFORE COURT 1 (ITEM 41). WE, THEREFORE, DIRECTED THE ADVOCATES TO BE PRESENT BEFORE US TODAY, AND THEY ARE BEFORE US TODAY. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT THAT WE NEVER SUSPECT THE TRUTHFULNESS OF FACTS STATED IN THE LETTERS CIRCULATED BY THE COUNSEL, PARTICULARLY IF ANY ACCOMMODATION IS SOUGHT ON PERSONAL GROUNDS, WE EXPECT MEMBERS OF THE BAR NOT TO STATE ANYTHING WHICH IS FALSE. II IS A BREACH OF FAITH IF FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN LETTERS CIRCULATED TO THE COURT ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF SEEKING AN ADJOURNMENT. THIS PRACTICE MUST BE DEPRECATED AND WE FEEL THAT WE CANNOT IGNORE THESE MATTERS ANY FURTHER, TO BE FAIR TO MR S.D. SINGH, ADVOCATE AND ALSO TO THE ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD, WHO CIRCULATED THE LETTER, WE CALL UPON THEM TO FILE AFFIDAVIT IN REPLY STATING THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH A LETTER WITH INCORRECT FACTS WAS CIRCULATED. WE SHALL THEREAFTER, CONSIDER WHAT ACTION SHOULD BETAKEN IN THE MATTER, AND WHETHER OR NOT THE MATTER SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA OR THE BAR COUNCIL CONCERNED FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION.

2. AS PRAYED FOR, WE GRANT THEM A WEEKS TIME TO FILE AFFIDAVIT IN REPLY. PUT UP SOON THEREAFTER.

COURT MASTERS