TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 726
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o.1, appeared and started his arguments by saying that "in the first half of the day his junior had prayed for adjournment and since this Court has refused to adjourn the matter, therefore, under compulsion he has come to argue the matter". The submission made by the counsel for respondent no.1 was not to the good taste, however, this Court ignored the said submission and requested the counsel for the respondent no.1 to proceed further with his arguments. During arguments, on two occasions again Shri Pratip Visoriya, counsel for respondent no.1, submitted that as he was not ready with the arguments, but since this Court has refused to adjourn the matter, therefore, under compulsion he is arguing the matter. It was further submitted by Shri Pratip Visoriya, counsel for respondent no.1, that old matters are pending and, therefore, the old matters should be decided first and this matter is of the year 2017 and only because there is stay of the further proceedings in the civil suit, therefore, this matter cannot be treated as an old matter. When it was clarified by this Court that the cases are being taken up as per the serial numbers of the cause-list and the case has not been taken u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its synonyms are misdemeanour, misdeed, misbehaviour, delinquency, impropriety, mismanagement, offence, but not negligence or carelessness." 18. The expression "professional misconduct" was attempted to be defined by Darling, J., in A Solicitor, ex p, Law Society, in re in the following terms: "If it is shown that an advocate in the pursuit of his profession has done something with regard to it which would be reasonably regarded as disgraceful or dishonourable by his professional brethren of good repute and competency, then it is open to say that he is guilty of professional misconduct." 19. In R.D. Saxena v. Balram Prasad Sharma this Court has quoted the above definition rendered by Darling, J., which was subsequently approved by the Privy Council in George Frier Grahame v. Attorney-General and then observed thus: (SCC p. 275, para 19) "19. Misconduct envisaged in Section 35 of the Advocates Act is not defined. The section uses the expression 'misconduct, professional or otherwise'. The word 'misconduct' is a relative term. It has to be considered with reference to the subject-matter and the context wherein such term occurs. It literally means wrong conduct or improper con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on account of the dimension of his judicial powers can be a persuading factor for granting such adjournments lavishly, that too in a casual manner." 22. When the Bar Council in its wider scope of supervision over the conduct of advocates in their professional duties comes across any instance of such misconduct it is the duty of the Bar Council concerned to refer the matter to its Disciplinary Committee. The expression "reason to believe" is employed in Section 35 of the Act only for the limited purpose of using it as a filter for excluding frivolous complaints against advocates. If the complaint is genuine and if the complaint is not lodged with the sole purpose of harassing an advocate or if it is not actuated by mala fides, the Bar Council has a statutory duty to forward the complaint to the Disciplinary Committee. 23. In Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar a four-Judge Bench of this Court had held that the requirement of "reason to believe" cannot be converted into a formalised procedural roadblock, it being essentially a barrier against frivolous enquiries. 24. In our opinion, the State Bar Council has abdicated its duties when it was found that there was no p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not to take the case forward?" Thereafter, the Court proceeded to answer thus: (Shiv Cotex case, SCC pp. 682-83, paras 15-16) "15. It is sad, but true, that the litigants seek -and the courts grant-adjournments at the drop of the hat. In the cases where the Judges are little proactive and refuse to accede to the requests of unnecessary adjournments, the litigants deploy all sorts of methods in protracting the litigation. It is not surprising that civil disputes drag on and on. The misplaced sympathy and indulgence by the appellate and revisional courts compound the malady further. The case in hand is a case of such misplaced sympathy. It is high time that courts become sensitive to delays in justice delivery system and realise that adjournments do dent the efficacy of the judicial process and if this menace is not controlled adequately, the litigant public may lose faith in the system sooner than later. The courts, particularly trial courts, must ensure that on every date of hearing, effective progress takes place in the suit. 16. No litigant has a right to abuse the procedure provided in CPC. Adjournments have grown like cancer corroding the entire body of justice deliver....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., while dealing with the role of an advocate in a criminal trial, has observed as follows: (SCC pp. 723-24, para 3) "3. We are unable to appreciate the difficulty said to be experienced by the petitioner. It is stated that his advocate is finding it difficult to attend the court from day to day. It is the duty of every advocate, who accepts the brief in a criminal case to attend the trial from day to day. We cannot overstress the duty of the advocate to attend to the trial from day to day. Having accepted the brief, he will be committing a breach of his professional duty, if he so fails to attend." 20. In Mahabir Prasad Singh, the Bench, laying emphasis on the obligation of a lawyer in his duty towards the Court and the duty of the Court to the Bar, has ruled as under: (SCC p. 44, paras 17-18) "17. ... 'A lawyer is under obligation to do nothing that shall detract from the dignity of the court of which he is himself a sworn officer and assistant. He should at all times pay deferential respect to the Judge, and scrupulously observe the decorum of the courtroom.' 18. Of course, it is not a unilateral affair. There is a reciprocal duty for the court also to be courteous to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s agony and anguish. Whatever may be the nature of litigation, speedy and appropriate delineation is fundamental to judicial duty. Commenting on the delay in the justicedelivery system, although in respect of the criminal trial, Krishna Iyer, J. had stated thus: (Babu Singh case, SCC p. 581, para 4) "4. ... Our justice system, even in grave cases, suffers from slow motion syndrome which is lethal to 'fair trial', whatever the ultimate decision. Speedy justice is a component of social justice since the community, as a whole, is concerned in the criminal being condignly and finally punished within a reasonable time and the innocent being absolved from the inordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings." 24. In criminal jurisprudence, speedy trial has become an indivisible component of Article 21 of the Constitution and it has been held by this Court that it is the constitutional obligation on the part of the State to provide the infrastructure for speedy trial [see Hussainara Khatoon (3) v. State of Bihar and Hussainara Khatoon (4) v. State of Bihar]. 25. In Diwan Naubat Rai v. State (Delhi Admn.), it has been opined that the right to speedy trial encompasses all stages of trial, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tigant expects a reasoned verdict from a temperate Judge but does not intend to and, rightly so, to guillotine much of time at the altar of reasons. Timely delivery of justice keeps the faith ingrained and establishes the sustained stability. Access to speedy justice is regarded as a human right which is deeply rooted in the foundational concept of democracy and such a right is not only the creation of law but also a natural right. This right can be fully ripened by the requisite commitment of all concerned with the system. It cannot be regarded as a facet of Utopianism because such a thought is likely to make the right a mirage losing the centrality of purpose. Therefore, whoever has a role to play in the justice-dispensation system cannot be allowed to remotely conceive of a casual approach. 29. In this context, it is apt to refer to a passage from Ramdeo Chauhan v. State of Assam: (SCC p. 739, para 22) "22. ... The judicial system cannot be allowed to be taken to ransom by having resort to imaginative and concocted grounds by taking advantage of loose sentences appearing in the evidence of some of the witnesses, particularly at the stage of special leave petition. The la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me. Adding to the misery, the official concerned took his own time to put the file in order. From the Registrar General's communication it is perceptible that some disciplinary action has been initiated against the erring official. That is another matter and we do not intend to say anything in that regard. But the fact that cannot be brushed aside is that there is enormous delay in dealing with the case. Had timely effort been made and due concern bestowed, it could have been avoided. There may be cases where delay may be unavoidable. We do not intend to give illustrations, for facts in the said cases shall speak for themselves. 33. In the case at hand, as we perceive, the learned counsel sought adjournment after adjournment in a non-chalant manner and the same were granted in a routine fashion. It is the duty of the counsel as the officer of the court to assist the court in a properly prepared manner and not to seek unnecessary adjournments. Getting an adjournment is neither an art nor science. It has never been appreciated by the courts. All who are involved in the justice-dispensation system, which includes the Judges, the lawyers, the judicial officers who work in courts, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ments and above all, must not try to pinch the Court, by saying that since, the adjournment has been refused, therefore, under compulsion, they are arguing the matters. Once, the lawyer has accepted the brief, then it is his bounden duty towards the institution. They have a duty towards their client, they have a duty to prepare the case and present the case properly without suppressing any fact, so that they can effectively assist the Court. Seeking adjournments for no reason does amount to professional misconduct and the Bar Councils must also rise to the occasion either by issuing necessary instructions to the Advocates on its roll or by taking disciplinary action against the Advocate, if any complaint with regard to seeking unnecessary adjournments by the Advocate is made. The Advocates are not the mouth piece of their clients for the purposes of delaying the Court proceedings, nor they should avoid hearing but being the officers of the Court, they have sacrosanct duty towards the Court. Once, the case is listed in the Cause list, then any Advocate cannot refuse to argue the matter on the ground that older matters are also pending, therefore, the comparatively new matter should ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the petitioner on 3/9/2012 to the effect that respondent no.1 has repaid the entire loan amount and nothing is outstanding against respondent no.1, therefore, the petitioner would not proceed further for mutation of his name on the basis of the sale deed and all the documents would be treated as null and void. This contention made by respondent nos.1 and 2 in the plaint was denied by the petitioner. After the evidence of the parties were over, the respondent no.1 filed an application for sending the agreement to a handwriting expert for comparison of the thumb impression. The said application was allowed by the trial court and the report of the handwriting expert was placed on record. It appears that petitioner by filing the application under Order XXVI Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC filed his objection to the report and prayed that the report of the handwriting expert submitted by the respondent no.1 be rejected. Apart from that, one more application was filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of CPC seeking permission of this Court to file a report by a handwriting expert in rebuttal of the report of the handwriting expert filed by the respondent no.1. The trial court ....