KUMAR GONESH CHUNDER MULLICK Vs. SMNARAYANI DASSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this application briefly are as follows : Kumar Gonesh Chunder Mullick hereinafter described for convenience as the client engaged Messrs. Charu Chunder Bose & Co. as his attorneys for the conduct of Suit No. 950 of 1934 instituted by him against one Sm. Narayani Dassi for the recovery of a sum of money. The suit was decreed in favour of the client on 17 August 1934 for the sum of Rs. 17,206-6-0 with interest and costs. Premises No. 13, Bentinck Street which belonged to the estate of the defendant Narayani Dassi's husband was acquired by the Calcutta Improvement Trust and the compensation money paid therefor lay in deposit with the Calcutta Improvement Trust Tribunal. In execution of the aforesaid decree the client through his attorneys, Messrs. Charu Chunder Bose & Co., attached the sum of Rs. 18,000 lying in, deposit with the said tribunal on 20 December 1934. Thereafter, the two daughters of Narayani Dassi, namely 8m. Lajabati Dassi and Sm. Lilabati Dassi, objected to this money being attached on the ground that the decree passed against their mother Sm. Narayani Dassi was not binding on the estate of their father. On 6th April 1936 the decree was amended on the application of Sm. Narayani Dassi, and it was directed in the decree that the decretal amount was to be paid out of the estate of Narayani Dassi's husband whose name is Brojonath Chunder. Thereafter the writ of attachment was amended and the property was again attached. Upon this the two daughters of Narayani Dassi mentioned above instituted a suit in this Court being Suit No. 1230 of 1936, inter alia, for a declaration that the decree passed against Narayani Dassi in Suit No. 950 of 1934 was not binding upon the estate of their father Brojonath Chunder.

(2.) In this suit Kumar Gonesh Chunder Mullick was one of the defendants and the solicitors Messrs. Charu Chunder Bose & Co. acted on behalf of Gonesh Chunder Mullick. The suit ended in a compromise decree. Among the terms of the compromise decree the following only need be stated. It was declared that the decree passed in Suit No. 950 of 1934 was binding on the estate of Brojonath Chunder deceased and on his reversioners. The defendant Gonesh Chunder Mullick agreed to accept the sum of Rs. 16,000 in full settlement of his claim and costs under the aforesaid decree, and it was declared that he was entitled to realize and recover this sum out of the estate of Brojonath Chunder. It was also declared that the attachment on the moneys lying with the Calcutta Improvement Trust Tribunal in execution of the decree passed in Suit No. 950 of 1934 should remain subsisting. This decree was passed on 4 February 1938. The petitioners who are the attorneys of Kumar Gonesh Chunder Mullick state that the costs due to them by the client in respect of both these suits amount to Rs. 3100 which is yet unpaid.

(3.) After the consent decree was passed, the client was adjudicated insolvent on 22nd February 1938. Thereafter the Official Assignee applied to the Calcutta Improvement Trust Tribunal for payment of the sum of Rs. 16,000 direct to him. The petitioners claim that before this sum is paid over to the Official Assignee the sum of Rs. 3100 should be paid to them on the ground that they have a lien for this amount on the sum of Rs. 16,000 which was procured for the client by the exertions of the petitioners as his attorneys.