An advocate appearing in his own cause is not entitled to argue with his robes on, as a litigant in person is not exercising the right to practice under the Advocates Act, 1961.

( 1 ) IN response to Notification No. GOB 291/72 dt. 4-4-1972 and published in the Mysore Gazette dt. 6-4-1972, Sri T. Venkanna, a practising Advo cate offered himself for being considered by the High Court for recommendation to be appointed as a District Judge. Since he was not called for interview by the High Court, he preferred WP. No. 2937 of 1972 which came up for preliminary hearing for admission on the 28th of November 1972 before us. The petitioner was not represented by Counsel and he appeared in person and wanted to argue from the Bar his own cause. He was told by us to disrobe himself and then address the Court. The petitioner insisted that he should be heard without being required to remove his Gown. Being of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to argue with his robes on since he was arguing his own cause, his petition was dismissed.

( 2 ) THE said order reads thus :" The petitioner Sri T. Venkanna is an Advocate of this Court. He has not engaged any Counsel to argue his case, but appeared in person and wanted to argue from the Bar his own cause. He was told by the Court to disrobe himself and then address the Court. He did not disrobe himself and then argue his case. Sri Venkanna being an advocate in his own cause, he is not entitled, in our opinion, to exercise the privileges of an Advocate and address the Court from " The bar" in these circumstances, we reject the writ petition. "

( 3 ) ON 29-11-1972 the petitioner filed IA. No, I wherein he has prayed that our order dt. 28-11-1972 be recalled and he be permitted to argue his case with his robes on. When the matter came up for hearing on IA. No. 1 we told Sri S. K. Venkataranga lyengar, learned Counsel for Sri Venkanna in IA. No. 1 that we will recall our order dt. 28-11-1972 if the Counsel would argue the case at the preliminary hearing for admission. We also told him that if sri Venkanna would comply with the directions of this Court and argue without his robes on, we will permit him to argue after recalling our earlier order. Sri lyengar after consulting his client told us that he has been engaged only to argue the interlocutory application and rot the mam matter for admission and that Sri Venkanna is not prepared to argue unless we permit him to argue with his robes on. We heard Sri lyengar on the question whether an Advocate appearing in his own cause is entitled to argue before this Court with his advocate's robes on.

( 4 ) THE argument of Sri lyengar was that whatever the practice might have been before the coming into force of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) the petitioner who is himself an Advocate is entitled to argue from the Bar his own cause with his Advocate's robes on. The learned Counsel relied on S. 30 of the Act which states that ' under the provisions of the Act, every Advocate whose name 13 entered in the common roll shall be entitled as of right to prartise throughout the territories to which the Act extends, in all Courts including the Supreme court'. Subsec. (1) of S. 34 of the Act empowers the High Court to make rules laying down the conditions subject to which an Advocate shall be permitted to practise in the High Court and the Courts subordinate thereto. Rule 12 of the Rules prescribes the dress to be worn by Advocates appearing before the High Court and the Courts subordinate thereto. Under the said Rule, the dress prescribed for Men advocates is Black coat, Bands and Gown The argument of Sri Iyengar was that there is no provision under the Act or the Rules made thereunder that an Advocate appearing before this- Court when he argues his own cause he should remove his Gown and that in the absence of such a Rule the petitioner has the right to wear his advocate's robes when he argues his own case.

( 5 ) THE word 'advocate' is a technical term in India and other countries whose legal system, is based on the Roman law. The corresponding name in the English law courts is 'counsel' or Barrister'. Advocate, in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document