SMETHAM BYRNE AND LAMBERT Vs. DARASHAW ERUCHSHAW KARANJAWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) [His Lordship after setting out the facts of the case and discussing evidence bearing on the question of fact arising in the case came to the conclusion that an agreement for payment of costs was made between the parties. His Lordship then proceeded:] It was contended by Mr. Pardiwalla for the defendant that this suit was premature and would not lie inasmuch as, according to his submission, taxation of the bill of costs on the Original Side was a condition precedent to a right to demand payment of the costs and a fortiori to a right to sue for the recoveryl thereof, Mr. Pardiwalla referred to Rule 534 of the High Court Rules, which is as follows: The Taxing Master shall tax the bills of costs on every side of the Court (except the Appellate Side) and in the Insolvency Court. All other bills of costs of attorneys shall also be taxed by him when he is directed to do so by a Judge's order.

(2.) HE argued that it was open to the plaintiffs to obtain an order from a Judge on the Original Side by a summons for taxation of the bill of costs and that not until such an order had been obtained a demand made and a refusal to pay had the plaintiffs any right to seek to enforce payment of their bill.