Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.N. MANJULA, J.
The Bar Council of Tamilnadu & Puducherry, Rep. By its Secretary, Chennai - Appellant
Versus
V.K. Sethukumar & Others - Respondent
C.R.P (PD). No. 1347 of 2022 & C.M.P. No. 7058 of 2022
Decided On : 22-08-2022
Advocates Act - Disciplinary Proceedings - Section 42(2), Section 48 - The court discussed the provisions of the Advocates Act, particularly Section 42(2) and Section 48, which deem the proceedings before the Disciplinary Committee of a Bar Council to be judicial proceedings and provide indemnity against legal proceedings for acts done in good faith. The court analyzed the application of these provisions to the case and their implications on the maintainability of the suit against the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and its members.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff, an advocate, filed a suit seeking damages against the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and others for alleged professional misconduct. The Bar Council had initiated disciplinary proceedings against the plaintiff based on a complaint by a third party, which resulted in a finding of guilt and reprimand. The plaintiff appealed to the Bar Council of India, which set aside the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamilnadu. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed the present suit for damages.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the proceedings before the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council were deemed to be judicial proceedings and were indemnified against legal proceedings under the Advocates Act. The court held that the plaintiff had exhausted the appeal remedy by challenging the order of the State Bar Council before the Bar Council of India and getting it reversed. The court concluded that the plaintiff could not have any cause of action against the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and its members, as the order of the lower forum had merged with the order of the Appellate Forum and the plaintiff had accepted the order of the Appellate Forum.
Issues: The issues involved in the case included the maintainability of the suit against the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and its members, the application of statutory immunity under Section 48 of the Advocates Act, and the effect of the appellate forum's order on the order of the lower forum.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the provisions of the Advocates Act, particularly Section 42(2) and Section 48, and the application of the doctrine of merger. The court held that once an order is passed by an appellate forum and accepted by the appellant, the order of the lower forum merges with the order of the Appellate Forum and loses its identity. Therefore, the plaintiff could not have any cause of action against the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and its members.
Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was allowed, and the order of the trial court was set aside and modified to strike out the names of the defendants 1 to 6 from the plaintiff's suit. The court also ordered the names of the deceased defendants to be struck out. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decreetal order dated 15.03.2022 made in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in OS.No.5174 of 2020 on the file of learned V Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)
1. This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the order of learned V Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dated 15.03.2022 made in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in OS.No.5174 of 2020.
2. The 1st respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in OS.No.5174 of 2020, seeking for the relief of damages to the tune of Rs.50,00,000/- against the revision petitioner herein and other defendants along with interest. The 1st defendant is the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, which is a statutory authority under the Advocates Act, 1961.
3. Mr.V.K.Sethukumar, 1st respondent/plaintiff is an advocate, who was originally enrolled with the Bar Council of Kerala and later got himself transferred to the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry in the year 1983. The 7th defendant, Mr.T.Mahesh Kumar Bhandari has filed a complaint against the plaintiff to the Bar Council of Tamilnadu by alleging some professional misconduct. In the disciplinary proceedings in D.C.C.No.37/2012 taken by the Bar Council of Tamilnadu, by its order dated 22.06.2013, the 1st respondent/ plaintiff was found guilty of professional misconduct and he was reprimanded with certain directions. The 1st respondent/plaintiff-V.K.Sethukumar filed an Appeal before the Bar Council of India in DC. Appeal No.39 of 2013 and in the said Appeal, the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Tamil Nadu Bar Council was set-aside, by its proceedings dated 29.11.2014. Having got the above order in his favour from the Bar Council of India, V.K.Sethukumar has filed the present suit in OS.No.5174 of 2020.
4. Originally the said suit was filed before the High Court in its Original Side jurisdiction. Later, the suit was transferred to the jurisdiction of the City Civil Court, Chennai on the point of jurisdiction. During the pendency of the said suit, the 1st defendant namely the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry has filed an application in I.A.No.2 of 2021 under Order VII Rule 11 to reject the plaint. The said application was dismissed by the impugned order. Aggrieved over that, the 1st defendant has filed this Civil Revision Petition.
5. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the 1st respondent appearing in person and also perused the materials available on record.
6. Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Bar Council of Tamilnadu is a Statutory Body and the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has been vested with the powers of the Civil Court, while conducting disciplinary proceedings on the complaints against the advocates for any alleged misconduct; as per Section 42 (2) of the Advocates Act, all proceedings before the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Panel Code and every such Disciplinary Committee shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for the purposes of Sections 480, 482 and 485 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6.1. It is further submitted that such proceedings or orders passed by the Disciplinary Committee are indemnified against any legal proceedings before this Court by virtue of Section 48 of the Advocates Act; if the 1st respondent /plaintiff-V.K.Sethukumar is aggrieved due to the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamilnadu, he is entitled to prefer an Appeal before the Bar Council of India; if the order of the Bar Council of India is also not satisfactory to either of the parties, they are entitled to challenge the same before the Supreme Court of India; the above scheme in the Advocates Act would only show how much of sanctity is given to the orders of the Di
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of statutory immunity under Section 48 of the Advocates Act and the doctrine of merger, which resulted in the plaintiff's lack of c....
The Bar Council can initiate disciplinary action based on a reasonable belief of wrongdoing or a formal complaint without infringing on an advocate's rights until a final order is made.
The court established that a civil suit can be struck off if it constitutes an abuse of process of law, particularly when it mirrors previously adjudicated matters and lacks a valid cause of action.
Point of Law : It is one of the fundamental rules of our constitutional set-up that every citizen is protected against exercise of arbitrary authority by the State or its officers. Duty to act judici....
Professional misconduct by Advocate – Disposal of a complaint received by State Bar Council under Section 35 within a period of one year from date of receipt of such complaint is mandatory.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
