Deepak Gupta: The main point raised in these cases is whether a fresh counsel can appear in a matter without obtaining consent from the counsel previously engaged and appearing in the matter and without determining the Vakalatnama of the previous counsel? An ancillary question, which has arisen, is whether the decision of the main appeal determines the Vakalatnama and thereafter a fresh counsel can appear without obtaining such consent?

2. I have heard Sh. Ajay Sharma who was previously engaged as a counsel in the matter and Ms. Salochna Kaundal, who has filed these applications for release in a decided matter. Since the matter involved an important question I had requested the Chairman of the Bar Counsel and the President of the HP. High Court Bar Association to assist me in the matter. Consequently, I have also heard Sh. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate Chairman Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh and Mr. R.K. Gautam, Senior Advocate who is also a member of the Bat Council, on this issue.

3. The Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 have been framed by the Bar Council of India under the provisions of Advocates Act, 1965. Section 49 (c) of the said Act provides that the Bar Council of India may frame rules relating to the standards of professionals conduct and etiquette to be observed by Advocates. The Bar Council of India Rules have been framed by the Bar Council in India in exercise of the powers given to it. Rule 39 of Chapter-II of part-VI reads as follows:- "39. An Advocate shall not enter appearance in any case in which there is already a vakalat or memo or appearance filed by an Advocate engaged for a party except with his consent; in case such consent is not produced he shall apply to the Court stating reasons why the said consent could not be produced and he shall appear only after obtaining the permission of the Court."

4. A bare perusal of this Rule clearly indicates that no Advocate should file his Vakalatnama or put in appearance in any case in which the party is already represented by an Advocate without obtaining the consent of such Advocate. In case such consent is not forthcoming and cannot be produced the party/counsel should apply to the Court giving reasons thereof and shall only appear after the permission of the Court.

5. Order 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure relates to recognized Agents and Pleaders. Rule 4 of Order 3 reads as follows:- "4. Appointment of pleader- (1) No pleader shall act for any person in any Court, unless he has been appointed for the purpose by such person by a document in writing signed by such person or by his recognized agency or by some other person duly authorized by or under a power-of-attorney to make such appointment. (2) Every such appointment shall be filed in court and shall, for the purposes of sub-Rule (1) be deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the Court by a writing signed by the client or the pleader, as the case may be, and filed in Court, or until the client or the pleader dies, or until all proceedings in the suit are ended so far as regards the client. Explanation: - For the purposes of this sub-rule, the following shall be deemed to be proceedings in the suit;- (a) an application for the review of decree or order in the suit. (b) an application under Section 144 or under Section 152 of this Code, in relation to any decree or order made in the suit, (c) An appeal from any decree or order in the suit, (d) Any application or act for the purpose of obtaining copies of documents or return of documents produced or filed in the suit or of obtaining refund of moneys paid into the court in connection with the suit. (3) Nothing in sub-rule (2) shall be construed- (a) as extending, as between the pleader and his client, the duration for which the pleader is engaged, or (b) as authorizing service on the pleader of any notice or document issued by any Court other than the Court for which the pleader was engaged, except where such service was expressly agreed to by t