BANKING COMPANY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question has been raised as to the principle on which Advocates fee should be calculated in connection with Banking Company claims.

(2.) In the Rules issued by the High Court in 1952 under S.16 of the Bar Council Act XXXVIII of 1926, no specific reference is made in regard to the matter relating to fees payable to Advocates. It was indeed not possible to so refer because the Rules were framed on 11th March 1952 while the Banking Company Rules were themselves framed on 30.9.1952. Now there are three kinds of litigation which are possible in these matters. Firstly suits which have been filed in subordinate courts either as Small Cause Suits or original suits which have not been transferred to the High Court under sub-s.(3) of S.45(c) of the Banking Companies Act, secondly suits so filed but which have been transferred to the High Court, and thirdly claims against debtors of the Bank which are included in the lists of debtors to be settled under S.45D of the Act. We are not concerned with the first category. In respect of the second and third categories which we have to consider it is contended on behalf of the Advocates that the residuary Clause.(C) of R.20 of the 1952 Advocates Fee Rules:

(3.) It is argued by the Liquidator in connection with the last category, that the total claims covered by particular list must be added up and the aggregate amount arrived at should be taken to be the basis for calculating the overall Advocates fee in respect of the list concerned. That fee will then be distributed according to the amounts of the respective claims for inclusion in the certificates issued as for each of claims. This argument is rested upon the principle enunciated for the filing of Vakkalaths by Advocates appearing on behalf of the Court Liquidator in engagements in connection with getting list of debtors settled and looks attractive. But it seems to me that, that principle as to engagements as per lists has no necessary correlation to the question of Advocates fee with which we are concerned. Indeed it was held recently in this Court in Madhavi Amma v. Godaru Nambooripad, 1956 KLT 536 , that Advocates fee must depend upon the amount or value of each separate claim in the suit and not to the amount or value of all the claims taken together and reference was made to the principle underlying S.11 of the Court Fees Act. It follows that Advocates fee must be calculated in respect of each of the claims both for purpose of payment to Advocate and for inclusion in the certificates to be prepared as against each debtor. I hold, therefore, that the scale of Advocates fee applicable in cases of suits, will be regulated by R.7 Clause.(i) or (ii) of the Advocates Fee Rules, 1952, according to the nature of the suit concerned and that in cases of claims (comprised in lists of debtors) R.7 Clause.(i) will alone apply. Ordered accordingly.