Fiduciary handling of client funds bars unilateral fee appropriation; unauthorized retention by an advocate amounted to professional misconduct.

An advocate on record who retained and appropriated a client's unspent litigation balance without informing the client, without issuing a fee bill, and without seeking taxation was held to have committed professional misconduct. The Court found that the alleged oral authority to withdraw the balance was not proved, and that the client's money was held in a fiduciary capacity once received for a specific purpose. Even if a lien was claimed, the advocate could not unilaterally apply the funds towards fees without the client's consent or court-sanctioned taxation. Unauthorized retention and self-assessment of fees therefore justified disciplinary action, including suspension from practice.

---

---

Issues: Whether retention and appropriation by an advocate on record of a client's unspent litigation balance, without intimation, without a bill for fees, and without recourse to taxation, constituted professional misconduct warranting disciplinary action.

Analysis: The Court found that the alleged oral authority to withdraw the balance was not proved. The evidence also did not support any timely intimation to the client that the amount had been received, nor any contemporaneous demand for fees or lodging of a bill for taxation. The client's money, once received for a specific purpose, was treated as money held in a fiduciary capacity, and the Court held that even if a lien were asserted, the advocate could not unilaterally appropriate the amount towards fees without the client's consent or an order of the Court. The absence of any prior settlement of fees made self-judgment on the quantum payable impermissible.

Conclusion: The conduct amounted to professional misconduct. The disciplinary action of suspension from practice for two years was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: An advocate who receives client funds for a specific purpose holds them in a fiduciary capacity and cannot appropriate them towards fees without the client's consent or court-sanctioned taxation, and such unauthorized retention constitutes professional misconduct.

---