SANTOSH KUMAR BOSE MAJUMDAR Vs. KANIKA ALIAS MAMATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the two appeals (F.As. 187 and 197 of 1952) the Respondent Rajlakshmi had entered appearance through Shri J.M. De, Advocate. An application was filed by the said Respondent for determining the Vakalatnamas in favour of the said Advocate purporting to be an application under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of Order III of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The Petitioner states that there had been certain proceedings between the said Advocate and the Petitioner's husband Ramaprasad Choudhury. She therefore found it inconvenient to give instructions to the Advocate through her husband.

(3.) She had also recently engaged another Advocate Shri Rohini Kanta Ghose. According to the Respondent-Petitioner the original Advocate Shri De had already been paid his dues but the latter maintained that his fees were still due. The new Advocate Shri Ghose intimated verbally to the Court his inability to appear for the client unless the dues of Shri De were paid.