In a recent case decided by Delhi High Court, Brijesh Goyal v Daily Foods, an interesting legal issue arose: whether there is any bar on a pleader duly authorized by a party under a vakalatnama (power of attorney, or authority letter to the engaged advocate) to engage another pleader to plead the case on his or her behalf.
The suit was listed before the additional district judge (ADJ) for cross examination of the plaintiff’s witness.
However, on that day, the counsel for the defendant, in whose favour the defendant had executed the vakalatnama, deputized another advocate (by means of an authority letter) to appear, argue and cross-examine the witness on his behalf. The ADJ did not recognize the authority letter on the premise that neither the Advocates Act nor the Code of Civil Procedure recognized any such authority.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
The order passed by the ADJ upon being challenged before Delhi High Court was set aside by the court. On a perusal of the provisions of law, and the legal position as contained in the authorities of various high courts, the court found that there is no bar on a pleader duly authorized by a party under a vakalatnama to engage another pleader to plead the case on his or her behalf.
The power to plead would cover the right to examine witnesses, to conduct admission and denial, to seek adjournments and to address arguments.
Such a pleader, however, would not have the power to compromise a case, withdraw a case or do any other act which may compromise the interest of his or her client.
The court held that when a counsel has been authorized under a vakalatnama to represent his client, the junior of the said counsel can be permitted to appear on behalf of the counsel representing the client as and when the counsel himself is not in a position to appear.
In procedural matters it is both expedient and in the interest of speedy delivery of justice that young lawyers who work with pleaders duly authorized by clients are permitted to appear in matters.
This also provides encouragement to younger professionals who are in their initial years of practice. Judges have a duty to ensure that young lawyers who enter the portals of courts are permitted to learn, while also ensuring that the interest of parties is not permitted to be compromised.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The update of court judgments is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in, lbhasin@vsnl.com or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
