SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(AP) 68

MANOHAR PERSHAD, SUBBA RAO, MOHAMMED AHMED ANSARI
IN RE: MAHBUB ALI KHAN – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Judgement:-

Manohar Pershad, J.

[1] Through a letter dated 1-7-1956, the District and Session Judge, Bidar, reported to the High Court, Hyderabad, that Shri Mahbub Ali, an advocate, having filed his vakalatnama on be-half of 13 accused in Murder Case No. 10/8/55, State v. Dev Rao and Ors. has failed to attend the Court on the dates of hearing, viz., 16-6-55 and 1-7-55; that he sent a telegram expressing his inability to attend the Court; that the case had to be adjourned; that the accused had informed that they had already paid their fees to the advocate and that the file also is with the advocate. The District and Sessions Judge requested that the High Court may call for an explanation of the advocate and take necessary action against him. A notice was issued to the advocate by the High Court calling on him to submit his explanation. The advocate, it appears filed a counter and later an affidavit. It is stated in the counter that one Shri Seethal Pershad was the principal lawyer on behalf of the accused and that he (Mahboob Ali) was engaged by him to plead in the case on daily fee basis and that he could not attend the Court on the aforesaid dates of hearing as he was not paid his
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top