EMPEROR Vs. RAJANI NATH BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the learned District Judge of Sylhet, forwarding a report by the Munsif of Habiganj, under the Legal Practitioners Act, with respect to four pleaders. The charge drawn up against the pleaders was as follows: Whereas it appears that you Babu Rajani Nath Bhattacharjya, Babu Bipin Behary Roy and Babu Kshitish Chandra Chakravarti, pleaders for the plaintiff, and Babu Jogendra Chandra Deb, pleader for the defendant, engaged as pleaders for the plaintiff and the defendants respectively by vakalatnamas for conducting and pleading in Title Suit No. 264 of 1930, on behalf of the plaintiff and defendants respectively, and that in pursuance of a concerted movement of the pleaders to boycott the Courts today, abstained from appearing before the Court on behalf of the plaintiff and defendants respectively to conduct and plead in the aforesaid suit today, in spite of the fact that the said suit was being heard from day to day from 30 April 1980 and was adjourned today for farther hearing, and whereas you have thereby committed an act of deliberate negligence amounting to a grossly improper conduct in the discharge of your professional duties.

(2.) Notice of the charge was given to the pleaders, and they showed cause, filing written statements in support of their respective cases, by way of explanations. In support of the case stated in the written statements filed by three of the pleaders , Babus Rajani Nath Bhattacharyja, Bipin Behary Roy and Kshitish Chandra Chakravarty, there was an affidavit filed in Court, sworn by one Dina Nath Chakravarty, an officer and ammukhtear of Dinabandhu Roy, the plain- tiff in Suit No. 251 of 1930. The pleaders concerned did not, adduce any further evidence before the Munsif. It appears that seven witnesses were examined on behalf of the Government.

(3.) The report of the Munsif was that the pleaders were guilty of grossly improper conduct in the discharge of their professional duties. The learned District Judge in forwarding the report of the Munsif to this Court, has expressed the opinion that the findings of the Munsif were correct, and that the pleaders wore of grossly improper conduct in the discharge of their professional conduct, in absenting themselves from the Court on 7 May, 1930; and has recommended that the pleaders be suspended for such term as this Court may think proper.