https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278445 Pleaders' concerted refusal to appear before a Subordinate Judge was treated as serious misconduct because it conflicted with duties owed to clients and the orderly administration of justice. The Court stated that any grievance against the Subordinate Judge should have been taken to the higher judicial authorities, not met by a boycott of the court. However, because the pleaders made an unqualified expression of regret before the Court, it considered further punitive action unnecessary in the circumstances and took no further action on the references. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 1922 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Feb 2019 15:04:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278445 Pleaders' concerted refusal to appear before a Subordinate Judge was treated as serious misconduct because it conflicted with duties owed to clients and the orderly administration of justice. The Court stated that any grievance against the Subordinate Judge should have been taken to the higher judicial authorities, not met by a boycott of the court. However, because the pleaders made an unqualified expression of regret before the Court, it considered further punitive action unnecessary in the circumstances and took no further action on the references. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Jan 1922 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278445