VINAYAK KRUSHNA KALE Vs. JANARDAN KRUSHNA KALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two matters it came to my notice that the appearance filed on behalf of the respondent in Writ Petition No. 3589 of 1984 and on behalf of the petitioner in Civil Application No. 5444 of 1984 contained an endorsement that the responsibility of getting information about the different dates in the matter is on the client and subject to this condition alone the Vakalatnama has been filed. I passed an order on 10th October 1984 directing that I should hear the Advocates and the Bar Council on this.

(2.) Today Mr. Page, the learned Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the Bar Council. I heard Miss Mutalik, the learned Advocate appearing for the respondent in Writ Petition No. 3589 of 1984 and the petitioner in Civil Application No. 5444 of 1984.

(3.) Section 34(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961 empowers the High Court to make rules laying down the condition subject to which an Advocate shall be permitted to practice in the High Court and the Courts subordinate thereto. Accordingly, in exercise of this power, the High Court has made rules and Rule 2(1), in so far as it is relevant for the present purpose, states as follows :--