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

1998 Supreme(P&H) 1534

V.K.JHANJI
Arun Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
State Bank Of India – Respondent


Judgment

V.K.Jhanji, J.

1. Petitioner herein is an Advocate of this Court. In this petition, he is seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay remuneration of the petitioner on account of professional-fee for conducting cases on behalf of respondent-Bank at Ambala City Courts, in accordance with Rule 1 and 1-A of Chapter 16-B of the Rules and Orders of the High Court, Volume-I, and further for grant for interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the outstanding amount.

2. It is the admitted case of the parties that respondent-bank had entrusted some civil suits to be conducted by the petitioner on behalf of the Bank at Ambala City Courts. The grievance for the petitioner is that he has not been paid remuneration in accordance with the amended High Court Rules and Orders. The case of the respondent-bank is that fee is to be paid as per mutual settlement between the respondent and the counsel on the panel of the Bank. It is also said that fee used to be paid in stages i.e. 1/3rd was being paid at the time of entrustment of suits, and the balance at the time of conclusion of the case. It is contended that no legal right has been violated and as such,




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top