SARASWATI Vs. TUISI RAM SETH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that requires determination in this petition is whether a senior advocate, designated under the Advocates Act, 1961 and Supreme Court- Rules, is debarred from examining or cross-examining the witnesses as this would amount to 'acting' in a court on his part which admittedly a senior advocate is prohibited from doing.

(2.) A suit has been filed by the plaintiff-respondent for the recovery of Rs. 14,722.61 and a mandatory Injunction for possession under Section 66 of the Specific Relief Act. During the trial of the suit: Mr. Hans Raj Sawhney, a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court and the High Court appearing for the defendant, wanted to examine certain witnesses. This was objected to by Bawa Shiveharan Singh, Advocate, for the plaintiff on the ground that Mr. Sawhney being a senior advocate could not act. Accordingly, it was contented that as examination and cross-examination of witnesses come under the definition of the term 'act', Mr. Sawhney could not proceed with the examination or cross- examination of the witness. This contention found favour with Shri P. L. Singla, Subordinate Judge, who by his order dated November 28, 1967, held that examination and cross-examination of a witness is "acting' and as a senior advocate is debarred from 'acting' he is consequently debarred from examining and cross-examining the witnesses.

(3.) A revision was filed against that order which .came before me sitting singly. I felt that the point raised in the revision is important for the members of the bar and it was in the fitness of things that this matter be decided by a larger bench. I, therefore, referred this matter to my lord the Chief Justice for constituting a larger bench That ic how the matter has come upbefore us for decision.