W.B. SHANTHI Vs. ARUNACHALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal involves an important question concerning legal profession.

(2.) Plaintiff Arunachalam has been a senior member of Tenkasi Bar. He has commanded good practice, both on the civil side and on the criminal side. His volume of work is an indication that he built up a lucrative practice. Clients flocked to him. Since he is a lawyer of eminence, he has had disciples. He became a mentor of many budding lawyers. Arunachalam's Office produced many good lawyers.

(3.) Advocate Arunachalam has been engaged by one Kathirvel Murugan. On the instruction of his said client, Advocate Arunachalam (P.W.1) issued Ex.A.1 lawyer notice dated 20.04.2001 to defendant Natarajan, (D.W.1). Defendant himself sent Ex.A.3 reply dated 27.04.2001, to Advocate Arunachalam. On reading Ex.A.2, Advocate Arunachalam got wounded, upset because it contained personal imputations against him, criticizing him as a lawyer. It was personal insinuation against him. Under these circumstances, Advocate Arunachalam issued him Ex.A.3 notice dated 12.05.2001, demanding Rs.1,00,000/- as damages for having sent Ex.A.2. It was received by him under Ex.A.4, Acknowledgment.