RAMON SERVICES P LTD Vs. SUBHASH KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted.

(2.) ANOTHER ticklish issue concerning legal profession has winched to the fore which, perforce, has to be decided by us in this case. Should a litigant suffer penalty for his advocate boycotting the court pursuant to a strike call made by the association of which the advocate was a member? the question arose in this case after the suit was decreed ex parte by the trial court in consequence of the nonappearance of the Counsel on a day fixed for hearing, on the premise of the strike call.

(3.) WE have no doubt that the legal position adumbrated by the Additional District Judge as well as the High Court, cannot be taken exception to. When the advocate who was engaged by a party was on strike, there is no obligation on the part of the court, either to wait or to adjourn the case on that account. Time and again this court has said that an advocate has no right to stall the court proceedings on the ground that advocates have decided to strike or to boycott the courts or even boycott any particular court. Vide U. P. Sales Tax Service Association v. Taxation Bar Association, agra & Ors. (JT 1995 (6) SC 306b =1995 (5) SCC 716); K. John Koshy & ors. v. Dr. Tarakeshwar Prasad Shaw (1998 (8) SCC 624); Mahabir prasad Singh v. Jacks Aviation UT 1998 (7) SC 579 =1999 (1) SCC 37); and koluttumottil Razak v. State of Kerala (2000 (4) SCC 465 ).