https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200583 The High Court set aside the trial court's decision to allow the attorney to withhold the pronote based on a claim of lien under Section 171 of the Contract Act. The court emphasized that an advocate's right to retain documents is excluded when there is an implied contract to the contrary. The court ruled that the advocate's claim of lien was unjustified as there was no discharge by the client. Additionally, the court held that the loan contract could be proven independently of the pronote, directing a retrial of the suit with costs to abide by the outcome. en-us Tue, 27 Apr 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Apr 2018 09:53:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200583 The High Court set aside the trial court's decision to allow the attorney to withhold the pronote based on a claim of lien under Section 171 of the Contract Act. The court emphasized that an advocate's right to retain documents is excluded when there is an implied contract to the contrary. The court ruled that the advocate's claim of lien was unjustified as there was no discharge by the client. Additionally, the court held that the loan contract could be proven independently of the pronote, directing a retrial of the suit with costs to abide by the outcome. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Apr 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200583