Judgement

NATARAJAN, J.:- Leave granted.

2. The limited question falling for our determination in this appeal by special leave is whether a suit for damages already instituted against a counsel has abated or not consequent on the death of the plaintiff.

3. We may now scan the facts. Pursuant to the High Court of Karnataka confirming an order of eviction passed against him in respect of his business premises, a tenant by name Mr. Sequeira wanted to prefer an appeal to the SC. For that purpose he met the appellant, who is an advocate practising in the SC, on 14-6-1971 at Mangalore during the latters visit to that place and engaged him to file the appeal. The special leave petition came up for hearing on 22-11-1971 and was "dismissed as withdrawn." Mr. Sequeira then filed a suit O. S. No. 255 of 1972 in the Court of the District Munsif, Mangalore against the appellant for damages and compensation. He alleged in the plaint that the appellant had been negligent in rendering professional services and had misconducted himself by filing the appeal after considerable delay and giving mis-leading information about the filing of the appeal and furthermore in withdrawing the appeal instead of can