ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE Vs. HAR PAWAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment all the three Revision Petition Nos. 3549 and 3550 and 3891 of 1996 can conveniently be disposed of because the controversy involved is identical in the said revision petitions.

(2.) Oriental Bank of Commerce-petitioner had filed three separate suits. Har Pawan Kumar respondent No. 1 is a practising advocate at District Courts, Faridabad. He had been engaged to represent the petitioner as its counsel. While the said civil suits were pending, the petitioner had written to the respondent No. 1 that his work was not found satisfactory and upto the mark and that his name was to be removed from the panel of advocates. The said claim was contested and respondent No. 1 prayed that there are no assertions of misconduct against him. In any case he has not been paid his fee for handling the cases. The petitioner filed an application requesting the Court to permit it to withdraw the power of attorney in favour of respondent No. 1 to which the reply of respondent No. 1 was similar in terms that he must be paid his fee according to the rates fixed by the High Court in the Schedule and that till such time his fee has not been paid, he has a right to continue as a counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) The learned Civil Judge at Faridabad vide the impugned orders held that the petitioner-Bank has changed the counsel i.e. respondent No. 1 which is contrary to the rules and directed that the respondent No. 1 will continue to be the counsel for the petitioner till the contract between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 is terminated with the leave of the Court after paying the full fee alongwith the fee of the junior. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petitions have been filed.