R D SAXENA Vs. BALRAM PRASAD SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main issue posed in this appeal has sequential importance for members of the legal profession. The issue is this: has the advocate a lien for his fees on the litigation papers entrusted to him by his client? in this case the Bar Council for India, without deciding the above crucial issue, has chosen to impose punishment on a delinquent advocate debarring him from practicing for a period of 18 months and a fine of Rs. 1000. 00. The advocate concerned was further directed to return all the case bundles which he got from his client - respondent - without any delay. This appeal is filed by the said advocate under section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

(2.) As the question involved in this appeal has topical importance for the legal profession we heard learned counsel at length. To appreciate the contentions we would present the factual backdrop as under:

(3.) Appellant, now a septuagenarian, has been practicing as an advocate mostly in the courts at Bhopal. after enrolling himself as a legal practitioner with the Slate Bar Council of madhya Pradesh. According to him, he was appointed as legal advisor to the Madhya pradesh State Co-operative Bank Ltd. ('bank'. for short) in 1990 and the Bank continued to retain him in that capacity during the succeeding years. He was also engaged by the said bank to conduct cases in which the Bank was a party. However, the said retainership did not last long. On 17/7/1993 the Bank terminated the retainership of the appellant and requested him to return all the case files relating to the bank. Instead of returning the files the appellant forwarded a consolidated bill to the Bank showing an amount of Rs. 97,100. 00 as the balance payable by the Bank towards the legal remuneration to which he is entitled. He informed the Bank that the files would be returned only after setting his dues.