MOTILAL GOPALDAS SHET Vs. KRISHNABAI GOPALRAO GARUD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suit was filed by the adopted son of the late Mr. Gopal Balvant Garud to recover certain fees due to his father, who carried on the profession of a pleader. The original plaintiff having died, the suit was continued by his mother. In the present application we are only concerned with an item of Rs. 109 debited in Mr. Garud a account on June 16, 1920, for his fees in Appeal No. 103 of 1920. The defendant admitted that he had engaged Mr. Garud in that appeal to appear, for him, and that he had put in his Vakilpatra in that appeal, but defendant denies his liability to pay Rs. 109 as Mr. Garud died before conducting the appeal The Judge said:_ This contention is obviously not tenable. Having made his appearance for the defendant in the appeal, Mr. Garud was entitled to get his legal fees It was no fault of his that ho died before the appeal was heard, and the defendant cannot escape from that liability simply because he had to incur further expanse by engaging another pleader.

(2.) That finding could only be correct, if it could be said that a pleader as soon as he has been retained, and has filed his Vakilpatra, becomes thereby entitled to recover the whole of his fees which are payable for his services until the final decree is passed. There is no support for such a proposition in the Bombay Pleaders Act.

(3.) Under Section 17 of the Act: Any party employing an pleader may settle with him by private agreement the terras of his engagement and the fee to be paid to him for his professional services.