Court has a dual duty – to protect a litigant who desires to change the Advocate and to protect the Advocate for payment of his just fees
It is in that regard that the Solicitor has
drawn my attention to the Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of
Alokik Trading and Investment Pvt. Ltd. & 3 Ors Vs. C.R. Iyyer
2000(1) GLR 495. It shows how the Court has a dual duty – to
protect a litigant who desires to change the Advocate and to protect
the Advocate for payment of his just fees and not relegate him to
filing a separate suit. The right of discharge must, therefore,
complement the right to fees.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER ORDER NO.559 OF 2012
IN
SUIT NO.1839 OF 1988
Arvind N. Savani Plaintiff
V/s.
Maganlal Savani & Ors. Defendants
CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J.
