RAMMOHAN Vs. JAYAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Revision Petition has not been numbered by the office of the High Court since the office felt a doubt whether the Vakalath of the Advocates accompanying the Revision Memorandum could be received in court for want of sufficient stamps required to be affixed under the provisions of the Kerala Advocates' Welfare Fund Act. A question of some importance on the point of revenue that may go to enrich the Advocates' Welfare Fund arises here. The State of Kerala can claim the credit of introducing for the first time in India an enactment to extend a substantial measure of social welfare to the members of the legal profession. The Act came into force on 5th April, 1981. The Government is obliged, under the provisions of the Act, to constitute a fund called the 'Advocates' Welfare Fund" to which amounts received from the Bar Council equal to 20 per cent of the enrolment fees realised by it is credited. Other contributions by the Bar Council of the State or voluntary donation or contribution made by the Bar Council of India, any Bar Association, any other association or institution, any advocate or any other person, besides any grant made by the State Government, would go to enrich the Welfare Fund There are several other items which augment the revenues of the fund. One which calls for mention here is that contemplated under S.3(2)(k), namely, "all sums collected under S.15 by way of application fees and annual subscriptions and interest thereon," S.15 enables every Advocate practising in any court in the State, if he is a member of a Bar Association recognised by the Bar Council, to apply to the Trustee Committee for admission as a member of the Fund, in such form as may be prescribed and on application he has to pay Rs. 200/- in the course of one year in four equal instalments and besides this he has to pay an annual subscription that being Rs 50/- if he be an advocate whose standing is 5 years or more but less than 15 years, and Rs. 100/- if he be an advocate with a standing of 15 years or more. An equally important item of revenue which goes to augment the fund is that provided in S.3(2)(j), namely "all sums collected by way of sale of stamps under S.22". The Bar Council is authorised to print and distribute Welfare Fund Stamps of the value of Rs 2/-. S.23 deals with the use of such stamps and that section reads:

(2.) The question raised in this case concerns the construction of S.23(1) of the Act. That requires that every member of the Fund shall affix one stamp "on every vakalath filed by him" and further that no vakalath shall be filed before or received by any court, tribunal or other authority unless it is so stamped. In this revision five counsel, evidently a senior along with his juniors, have filed the vakalath. They have affixed to the vakalath Welfare Fund Stamp of the Bar Council of the value of Rs. 2/-. There is no declaration under R.13 of the Rules that any of the five Advocates appearing in the case is not a member of the Fund. In fact there is no case that anyone of the five is not a member. The office of the High Court did not number the Criminal Revision Petition taking the view that in accordance with S.23 of the Act each one of the Advocates was obliged to affix a stamp so much so that the vakalath had to bear five stamps in place of the one now seen affixed. Since the counsel appearing in the case did not agree with this view the matter has been placed before us.

(3.) Art.16, Schedule If of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 deals with the value of the stamp required for Mukhtarnama, Vakalatnama or any paper signed by an advocate signifying or intimating that be is retained for a party. It provides that when presented to the High Court the stamp fee is Rs. 5/-. Reference in the article is to a vakalathnama signed by an advocate presented to the High Court O.3 R.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with appointment of pleader. Sub-r.(i) provides that no pleader shall act for any person in any court unless he has been appointed for the purpose by such person by a document in writing signed by such person or by his recognised agent or by some other person duly authorised by or under a power of attorney to make such appointment. Sub-r.(2), leaving out the Explanation which may not be relevant for our purpose, reads: