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

2019 Supreme(Cal) 20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J.
USHA KANTA DAS (DECEASED) - Appellant
Vs.
SEFALIKA ASH - Respondent
General Application No. 3659 of 2017; Testamentary Suit No. 25 of 2016
Decided On : 21-02-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Sutapa Sanyal, Adv., Niladri Banerjee, Adv., Tina Bhattacharya, Adv., Radha Nath Nandy, Adv.

Only enrolled advocates have the right to plead and argue before a court of law, as specified under the Advocates Act, 1961.

Headnote:

Power of Attorney - Right of Audience - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 8 of the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 - Section 29 of the Advocates Act, 1961

Fact of the Case:

Dispute over two Wills executed by Usha Kanta Das, involving the grant of probate and the right of audience for a power of attorney holder.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the application for the power of attorney holder to appear and act on behalf of the defendant/caveatrix, emphasizing that only enrolled advocates have the right to plead and argue before a court of law.

Issues: The main issue was whether the power of attorney holder had the right of audience before the court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the right to plead and argue before a court of law is reserved for enrolled advocates under the Advocates Act, 1961, and that a recognized agent or power of attorney holder does not have the same right.

Final Decision: The application for the power of attorney holder to appear and act on behalf of the defendant/caveatrix was dismissed, and the application for dismissal of the Testamentary Suit was to be placed before the appropriate Bench.

JUDGMENT :

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.

1. This is an application filed by one Radha Nath Nandy for leave to appear in person on behalf of the defendant/caveatrix.

2. The dispute relates to two Wills both allegedly executed by one Usha Kanta Das. The first Will was executed on 10th September, 1965 in which Amiya Kanti Das and Amar Nath Ash (now deceased) were made the joint executors. The testator (Usha Kanta Das) then substituted the first Will with the last and final Will dated 3rd October, 1975, which was registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta. In the last Will dated 3rd October, 1975, the testator replaced the name of his son-in-law, Amar Nath Ash (now deceased) and included his wife Smt. Ushabari Devi (now deceased) as the joint executor along with his son Amiya Kanti Das, the plaintiff no.1. It was specified in the last Will that in the event of the death of Ushabari, she shall be substituted by Jyotsna Das, the wife of Amiya Kanti Das for discharging the duty of an executor. After the death of Usha Kanta Das, the plaintiff, on coming to know of the existence of the Will dated 3rd October 1975, applied for grant of probate with the consent of both Shefalika Ash and Prativa Nandy. Shefalika Ash (defendant) and Prativa Nandy are the daughters of the deceased, Usha Kanta Das. After a considerable delay of about 5 years thereafter, the plaintiffs came to know that Shefalika Ash had filed an affidavit in support of a caveat on 19th December, 2012. The application for grant of probate being P.L.A no. 53 of 2010 was thereafter converted into the present testamentary suit. Issues were framed in the suit and after examination of the plaintiffs' first witness (Amiya Kanti Das), the claim of the plaintiffs was dismissed by a judgment dated 8th November, 2016. An appeal was preferred therefrom by the plaintiffs and by an order dated 26th April, 2017, the suit was remanded for adducing the evidence of Rabindralal Ghosh, the attesting witness to the Will, who the plaintiffs had intended to produce before the Trial Court. Both the plaintiffs and the caveatrix, namely, Shefalika Ash were represented by their advocates during these proceedings. The plaintiffs then applied for framing of additional issues before the learned Judge, who was hearing the suit. At this stage, Mr. Radha Nath Nandy (the applicant herein) expressed his intention to argue the matter on behalf of the defendant/caveatrix, Shefalika Ash. By an order dated 16th November, 2017, passed by the Hon'ble Justice Sahidullah Munshi, such liberty was denied on the ground that Order III Rules 1 and 2 of The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) does not give any scope to a party to represent a litigant if the concerned party is not an advocate. Mr. Radha Nath Nandy, was however, given leave to file an appropriate application for this issue to be considered. Mr. Radha Nath Nandy thereafter filed two applications under Order III Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC and another application for rejection of the plaint.

3. The issue in the instant application is whether Mr. Radha Nath Nandy has a right of audience before this court.

4. Mr. Radha Nath Nandy appearing in person, submits that he is the constituted attorney of Shefalika Ash, the defendant/caveatrix and has been authorized to act and argue, including signing affidavits, applications, etc as a “recognized agent” under Chapter I of the Original Side Rules of this court. Mr. Nandy cites Chapter XII of the Original Side Rules in relation to indigent persons in pursuance of his right to argue. Mr. Nandy cites a host of orders passed by different High Courts (without placing them individually) on the point of rights conferred by a power of attorney and that a holder of a power of attorney can appear, plead and act on behalf of the party who has given the power of Attorney. Mr. Nandy urges that he is otherwise competent and entitled in law to appear, argue and plead on behalf of the caveatrix. He also relies on Order III Rules 1 and 2 of


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top