2020 (10) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ring CP (IB) No. 2259/2019. The facts leading up to the present MA are as follows. 2. The Applicant/Corporate Debtor was being represented in the main CP by M/s. Taurus Legal, Advocates. A dispute arose between the Applicant/Corporate Debtor and M/s. Taurus Legal, Advocate, as a result of which the Applicant wishes to seek change of legal representation before this Tribunal. It was mentioned by the Learned Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of the Applicant/Corporate Debtor that the dispute is with reference to the fee payable for services rendered by the Counsel for the Applicant/Corporate Debtor in the main CP. 3. The MA came up for consideration before this Tribunal on 29.11.2019. This Tribunal ordered private notice to M/s.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngs in the matter has already been handed over to the Applicant/ Corporate Debtor in the matter and that no lien over the papers has been exercised. Further, the learned Counsel for M/s. Taurus Legal has reiterated in his submissions the stand taken in para 5 of the reply that the Advocates on record in the present Company Petition are ready and willing to give their NoC in the matter subject to payment of the balance fee. 8. In support of his contention regarding payment of fee, the learned Counsel for M/s. Taurus Legal has relied on a judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court dated 10.09.2012 in Arvind N Savani vs. Maganlal Savani & others [Chamber Order No. 559/2012 in Suit No. 1839/ 1988] wherein it has been held in para 9 and 10 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hon'ble Bombay High Court in that matter was referring to the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.08.2000 in RD Saxena vs. Balram Prasad Sharma 2000 (7) SCC 264, which speaks not only of claim of lien, but to the moral obligation of the Solicitor in allowing his client to change his Advocate. 10. The judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in RD Saxena would no doubt apply in cases where the advocate exercises a lien over the papers and retains the case bundle. However, such is not the case here. It is the explicit stand of M/s. Taurus Legal, Advocates, that they have not exercised any lien over the papers and that a copy of the pleadings has been handed over to the client. 11. It is seen from the main Company Peti....