ORDER: This is a Chamber Summons taken out by the Applicants who are a firm of Solicitors against their own clients for certain reliefs by way of a declaration of a lien for payment of their costs and for an order for payment of their costs. It will, however, be necessary for me later to set out and discuss the exact reliefs prayed for by this summons as the same are in dispute.

(2) This suit was originally filed on 27-11-1948 by one Adam Haji Pirmahomed Essak as the sole Plaintiff claiming damages for breach of a contract. The applicants were the Solicitors of the Plaintiff. During the pendency of this suit in July 1952 the applicants came to know that the Plaintiff had been declared an evacuee. The applicants therefore wrote a letter dated 18-7-1952 to the Assistant Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bombay setting out shortly the facts relating to this suit. The applicants further wrote:

"We understand that the abovementioned plain tiffs are adjudged evacuees. We suggest that the Custodian may be brought on record of the suit as plaintiff No. 1 (a) and the suit may be proceed ed with. We are conversant with all the facts of the case as we have attended to the matter right from the beginning. We shall therefore be glad to know from you if you desire to be added as Co-plaintiff to the suit and whether you will appoint us as your Solicitors and agree to pay our bill of costs of the suit."

(3) It would appear that thereafter there was a telephone conversation between the Assistant Custodian and one Parpia a partner of the applicants which the applicants by their letter dated 31-7-1952 addressed to the Custodian recorded as follows:

"With reference to the telephone conversation you had with our Mr. Parpia the other day, we beg to place on record that you would be liable to pay our further costs herein as your Attorneys and as regards costs prior to our appointment as Solicitors, we have to put in a claim in the ordinary way before you."

(4) By their letter dated 9-8-1952, the applicants in continuation of the said letter dated 31-7-1952 further wrote to the Custodian that the costs which the applicants would be entitled to recover from him would be costs taxed according to the Rules of the High Court, Bombay. By his letter in reply dated 16-8-1952 the Assistant Custodian wrote as follows:

"With reference to the correspondence resting With your letter No. H/7440/52 dated 9-8-1952, I am to state that you may please move the Court for bringing the Custodian on record as party Plaintiff and party Defendant respectively in the abovementioned two suits, and that you are appointed Solicitors for the Custodian in these two matters.

As regards your costs as Attorneys of the Custodian, I am to confirm that you will be entitled to recover the same as taxed under the Rules of the High Court, Bombay. With regard to costs prior to this, you may put in a claim in the manner provided in R. 22 of the Rules framed under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950."

(5) There is no dispute that from 16th August, 1952 the Applicants started acting as the Attorneys of the Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bombay, in respect of this suit. On the application of the Custodian, he was, on 7th October, 1952, joined as Plaintiff No. 1A in this suit. For convenience I will continue to call the original Plaintiff as the Plaintiff and the Custodian, being Plaintiff No. 1A, as the Custodian. On 25th January, 1955 a decree was passed in this suit for Rs. 6,559-11-0 for claim and for the taxed costs of the suit. That decree is in favour of both the Plaintiffs herein, i.e., the original Plaintiff and the Custodian. After the decree the Custodian, without the knowledge or intervention of the Applicants, entered into an agreement with the Defendants, the judgment-debtors herein, to accept the entire decretal amount of claim and costs in instalments of Rs. 300/- per month. The Applicants got their bill of costs of this whole suit taxed and on 19th March, 1957 served the allo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document