Assignment

Professional Ethics Practical

Name: DISHANT JAYESH DOSHI

Roll Number: 38

Division: B

Course: L. L. B. 3 YEARS – SEM I

College: GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE

Date:2nd JUNE, 2021

i
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that

Mr. Dishant Jayesh Doshi

Of Class First Year L.L.B. Roll No.38

Has Completed Professional Ethics Practical Assignment in the Academic Year 2020-2021 of
three years L.L.B. course.

Place: Mumbai Date: 2nd June 2021

Student Professor-In-Charge Principal

ii
 INDEX/CONTENT SHEET

Sr. No. Date Name of Chapter Page No.

“Profession of Law is a Noble Profession” discuss with

1. 01 – 04
reference to Professional Ethics.

Lawyer’s obligation to Client, Court, Other Lawyers / Public

2. 05 – 08
under the Indian Advocates Act, 1961

3. Nature, Scope & Objects of True Advocacy 09 – 11

Case Studies: Comment on following cases

4. a) Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh vs. Kurapati

Satyanarayan. 12 - 15

b) P.D. Gupta vs. Ram Murti & others. 16 – 18

iii
1. “PROFESSION OF LAW IS A NOBLE PROFESSION.” DISCUSS WITH
REFERNCE TO PROFESSIONAL ETHICS.
The legal profession plays an important role in the administration of justice. The lawyer
assists the court in arriving at a correct judgement. The lawyer collects legal materials relating
to the case and thereby helps the Court or Judge to arrive at a correct judgement. Without the
assistance of the lawyer, it would be a superhuman task for the Judge to arrive at a satisfactory
judgement. Justice P. N. Sapru has stated that the justification for the existence of the counsel
is that each side of the controversy should be in a position to present its case before an impartial
tribunal in the best and most effective manner possible. In the case of Madhav Singh the Court
has observed that advocates and pleaders are enrolled not only for the purpose of rendering
assistance to the Courts in the administration of justice but also for giving professional advice
for which they are entitled to be paid by those members of the public who require their services.

The lawyers play an important role in the maintenance of peace and order in the society.
The peace and order are no doubt, necessary for the very existence of the society. Learned C.
L. Anand has rightly stated that the advocates share with the judge’s responsibility for
maintaining order in the community. They do not promote strikes but settle them. They stand
for legal order which is one of the noblest functions in the society. Order which advocates seek
is not order of grave. It is order based on justice. Justice is the highest thing desired by men on
earth. It is the function of advocates to plead for legal justice for their clients or decision of
disputes according to the law. He has stated further those rights and liberties are the creation
of law and are subject to limitations imposed by the law. Advocates are every day defending
rights and liberties of citizens against all violators of the law.

The lawyers play important role in the law reform also. “By reason of the experience
gained in the daily application and interpretation of laws, lawyers are best aware of the
importance, imperfection of the legal system and constitute the most competent class of men
to advise on law reform and to promote popular enthusiasm and support for it. The most
difficult part of the process of legislation in the drafting of its provisions and on no one is better
fitted to give guidance on this than the lawyers.” The lawyers are not puppets compelled to
obey the dictate of their clients, where matters of good faith and honourable conduct are
concerned. They are responsible to the court for the fair honest conduct of a case. They are
agents, not of men who pay them but are acting in administration of justice.

1
 Thus, the legal profession is a profession of great honor. It has been created not for
private gain but for public good. It is not a monkey-making occupation but a branch of
administration of justice. Since it is not a business, a lawyer cannot solicit work or advertise
either directly or indirectly. An advocate is an officer of the Court and is required to maintain
towards the court a respectful attitude bearing in mind that the dignity of the judicial office is
essential for the survival of the society. The Supreme Court has rightly observed that the legal
profession is a partner with the judiciary in the administration of justice.
Legal profession is not a business but a profession. It has been created by the state for the public
good. Consequently, the essence of the profession lies in the three things -
1. Organization of its members for the performance of their function;
2. Maintenance of certain standards, intellectual and ethical for, the dignity of the
profession, and
3. Subordination of pecuniary gains to efficient service.

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS:

Professional ethics may be defined as a code of conduct written or unwritten for

regulating the behaviour of a practicing lawyer towards himself, his client, his adversary in law
and towards the Court. Thus, ethics of legal profession means the body of the rules and practice
which determine the professional conduct of the members of bar. When a person becomes an
advocate his relation with men in general is governed by the general rules of law but his conduct
as advocate is governed by the special rules of law: Professional Ethics of the Bar. The main
object of the ethics of the legal profession is to maintain the dignity of the legal profession and
the friendly relation between the Bench and Bar. Chief Justice Marshall has observed:

“The fundamental aim of Legal Ethics is to maintain the honour and dignity of the Law
Profession; to secure a spirit of friendly co-operation between the Bench and the Bar in the
promotion of highest standards of justice; to establish honourable and fair dealings of the
counsel with his client opponent and witnesses; to establish a spirit of brotherhood in the Bar
itself; and to secure that all the lawyers discharge their responsibilities to the community
generally.”

The American Bar Association Committee has well explained the need of the Code of
legal ethics. It has observed that the legal profession is necessarily the keystone of the arch of
Government. If it is weakened by allowing it to be increasing for subject to the corroding and

2
demoralising influence of those who are controlled by craft, greed and gain or other unworthy
motive, sooner or later, the arch must fall. The future of the country, thus, depends upon the
maintenance of the shrine of Justice pure and unruled by the advocates and it cannot be so
maintained, unless the conduct and motive of the members of the legal profession are what
they are ought to be. It, therefore, becomes the plain and simple duty of the lawyers to use their
influence in every legitimate way to help and make the bar, like judges, what it ought to be.
The Code of Ethics is one method of furtherance of this end. The Committee has further
observed that members of the bar, like judges, are officers of the Court and like judges, they
should hold office only during good behaviour. “Good behaviour” should not be a vague term.
It should be defined and measured by such ethical standards, however high, as are necessary to
keep the administration of justice, pure and unsullied. Such standards may be crystallized into
a written code of professional ethics and lawyer failing to conform thereto should not be
permitted to practise or retain membership in professional organisation.

The codification of the canons of the professional ethics may give impression that the
code is exhaustive while in reality it cannot be exhaustive. It has been rightly stated by P.
Ramanatha Aiyer, and N.S. Ranganatha Aiyer that it is not possible to formulate a code of legal
ethics which will provide lawyers with a specific rule to be followed in all varied relations of
his professional life. He has made it clear that it must not be assumed that in these canons of
an ethical code, or attempt whatever can be made to exhaust the subject or to lay down rules of
conduct which will be sufficient for all purposes and under all sets of circumstances.

In India, no statutory codification has yet been made on the point of professional ethics
but some of the State Bar Councils and Bar Council of India have termed their own rules of
professional conduct and etiquettes which the lawyer has to observe in his life. We often talk
to the professional about his ethics. The code of ethics for a lawyer is in no way different from
that of an ordinary person of morality and integrity. The character of a lawyer should be beyond
suspicion. It is therefore, necessary for a lawyer from the day of commencement of his carrier
as a lawyer, to cultivate truth, honesty and moral excellence. Though morality does not pay in
the beginning for his subsistence, but ultimately it brings reputation which is highly paying for
the profession. The paramount duty of an advocate is to assist the court in the task of
administration of justice. In the event of there being any conflict between interest and duty, the
advocate must prevail his duty. An advocate is expected to be fair and reasonable towards his
opponent as well.

3
 Thus, the lawyers and judges are considered the protector of justice. Because of such
an important role of lawyers, nothing should be done by them to lessen the people’s faith in the
honesty and integrity of the legal profession.

4
2. LAWYER’S OBLIGATION TOWARDS CLIENTS, COURT, OTHER LAWYERS,
PUBLIC UNDER THE INDIAN ADVOCATES ACT, 1961.

Section 49(1)(C) of the advocates Act, 1961, empowers the bar council of India to make
rules so as to prescribe the standards of professional conduct and etiquette to be observed by
the advocates. The bar council of India has made rules so as to specify the duties of an advocate
towards the Court, clients, opponents, colleagues, etc. and are explained below:

DUTY TO THE COURT:

1. An advocate is required to maintain towards the court a respectful attitude bearing in

mind that the dignity of the judicial office is essential for the survival of a free
community.
2. During the presentation of the case and while acting otherwise before the court an
advocate is required to conduct himself with dignity and self-respect. An advocate shall
not be servile and in case of proper ground for serious complaint a judicial officer, it is
his right and duty to submit his grievance to the proper authorities.
3. No advocate shall influence the decision of the Court by any illegal or improper means.
It prohibits the private communication with a judge relating to a pending case and
attempting to do so will amount to professional misconduct.
4. The advocate is required to use his best effort to restrain and prevent his client from
resorting to sharp or unfair practice or from doing anything in relation to the Court,
opposing counsel or parties which the advocate himself ought not to do. It also requires
the advocate to refuse to represent the client who persists in such improper conduct. He
shall not consider himself mere mouthpiece of his client and shall exercise his own
judgment in use of restrained language, avoiding scurrilous attacks in pleadings and
using intemperate language during arguments in courts.
5. An advocate shall appear in court at all times only in the prescribed dress and his
appearance shall always be presentable.
6. The advocate is not required to wear bands or gowns in public places other than in the
court except on such ceremonial occasions and at such places as the Bar Council of
India or the Court may prescribe.

5
 7. An advocate shall not act or plead in any matter which he is himself pecuniarily
interested. For example, an advocate should not act in a bankruptcy petition when he
himself is also a creditor of the bankrupt.

Case Law:

D.C. Saxena

V/s

Hon’ble, The Chief justice of India

AIR 1996 SC 2481

In this case, the Supreme Court has made it clear that the counsel or party appearing
before the court should not indulge in writing in pleadings, the scurrilous allegations or
scandalisation against the Judge or the Court. He should maintain dignity and decorum of the
court. If the reputation or dignity of the Judge who decides the case is allowed to be prescribed
in the pleadings the respect for the Court would quickly disappear and independence of the
judiciary would be a thing of the past.

DUTY TO THE CLIENT:

1. An advocate shall, at the commencement of his engagement and during the continuance
thereof make all such full and frank disclosure to his client relating to his connection
with the parties and any interest in or to about the controversy as are likely to affect his
client's judgments in either engaging him or continuing the engagement.
2. An advocate appearing for the prosecution of a criminal trial shall so conduct the
prosecution that it does not lead to conviction of the innocent.
3. An advocate is prohibited to commit (directly or indirectly) a breach of the obligations
imposed by section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act.
4. It is the duty of an advocate not to act on the instructions of any person other than his
client or his authorized agent.
5. The fee of an advocate depending upon the success of the suit is against the public
policy.

6
 6. An advocate is not prevented from bidding for or purchasing for his client any property
which his client may himself legally bid for or purchase, provided the advocate is
expressly authorized in writing in this behalf.
7. An advocate shall not do anything whereby he abuses or takes advantage of the
confidence reposed in him by his client.
8. It is the duty of an advocate to uphold the interest of his client fearlessly by all fair and
honorable means without regard to any unpleasant consequences of to himself or any
other.

Case Law:

Vikas Deshpande

v/s

Bar Council of India

AIR 2003 S.C. 308

In this case, the appellant advocate took advantage of the situation that the complainants
facing death sentence and obtained the power of attorney on misrepresentation in his favour
and sold the property of the complainants. The court held that he had committed a grave
professional misconduct. The Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of India permanently
debarred him from practicing as an advocate. The punishment was upheld by the Supreme
Court.

DUTY TO THE OTHER LAWYERS / PUBLIC:

1. An advocate shall not, in any way, communicate or negotiate upon the subject-matter
of controversy with any party represented by an advocate except through that advocate.
2. An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise (either directly or indirectly) whether by
circulars, touts, advertisements, personal communications, etc.
3. An advocate shall not enter appearance in any case in which there is already a
Vakalatnama or memo of appearance filled by an advocate engaged for a party except
with his consent in case such consent is not produced he shall apply to the court stating
reasons why the said consent should not be produced and he shall appear only after
obtaining the permission of the court.

7
4. It is the duty of an advocate not to engage in discussion or argument about the subject
of the dispute with the opposite party without notice to his counsel.
5. Every advocate shall in the practice of the profession of law bear in mind that anyone
genuinely in need of a lawyer is entitled to legal assistance even though he cannot pay
for it fully or adequately and that within the limits of an advocate’s economic condition,
free legal aid, assistance to the indigent and oppressed is one of the highest obligations,
as an advocate, he owes to the society.

8
3. NATURE, SCOPE AND OBJECT OF TRUE ADVOCACY.

Legal profession is a profession of great honour. It has been created not for private gain
but for public good. It is a partner with the judiciary in the administration of Justice. An
advocate is an officer of the Court. The Court acts on his statement. It is one of the most
brilliant, learned, noble and attractive profession. It needs not only a high depth of learning but
also a sense of social responsibility which calls for the high and noble conduct.

Advocacy is the presentation of logical facts of any dispute in a tight perspective

dealing with the criterion of differentiating between right and wrong, Just and unjust, equitable
and inequitable by applying the knowledge of law acquired by extensive and intensive learning
and in doing so, it employs the noblest facility of human mind and soul in order to discover the
true motives of his actions. A lawyer should be jack of all traders but master of none, except
the case he is pleading in the court of land.

The preparation and presentation of a case is an art which is attained by practice. There
is no royal road to success in profession. In law to earn success, one has to live like a hermit
and work like a horse.

NATURE:

The legal profession is the most independent one. A member of the legal profession
never hesitates to condemn tyranny or injustice. A lawyer stands for justice more than judge,
as he pleads for it. It is the quality of a lawyer that he has the capacity to analyse the facts and
penetrate into the innermost part of the human mind in order to cover the true motives of his
actions and to present them in an accurate and forceful form. There he has to perceive not only
head but heart too. These qualities which a lawyer has to acquire by learning and training, make
him a leader of the society. It is only because of his independent spirit of judgement. A lawyer
has to know about the human psychology. But the first and foremost essential thing for a lawyer
is to equip himself in legal learning. This learning should be wide and accurate. An advocate
should be industrious. No man has risen in legal profession by doing few hours of work here
and there according to his mood. It is the capacity for hard and regular work. No man has
succeeded in the legal profession merely by his intellect without industry. In spite of all these
remarkable characteristics of the profession unfortunately it is also perhaps one of most
maligned profession.

9
SCOPE:

Art of Advocacy helps a lawyer to become a successful lawyer. Justice Abott Parry has
mentioned seven lamps of advocacy – Honesty, Courage, Industry, Wit, Eloquence, Judgement
and Fellowship. An Advocate should be honest and a man of integrity and character. An
Advocate who is straightforward and possesses these three jewels is appreciated by the Court
and the client alike. Mannerisms also plays an important role in getting success in the legal
profession. He should be respectful to the court and try to win the confidence of the judge. He
should be respectful and should not interfere and interrupt the judge when he speaks. He should
take time to consider the question put by the judge to him in all aspects and then give reply.
Dealing with the client also plays an important role in getting success in the legal profession.
Soft, decent and fair dealings with the client make a lawyer popular amongst the clients.

Actually, good command over the language, good voice, good power of expression,
good knowledge of the law, good common sense, good presence of mind and good health all
help a lawyer to become a successful lawyer. In addition, the control over the temper is also
necessary for becoming a popular and successful lawyer. In his article “The Art of Winning
the Cases” Justice Ram Labhaya has stated that methodical preparation of the case is the most
essential prerequisite for success.

OBJECT:
The object of advocacy is winning cases, nothing more and nothing less. It consists in
persuading a court to do what you want. The court may have serious misgivings, but a good
advocate gives them no choice. The trying of cases in courts calls for an astute intelligence, the
capacity for instance instantaneous thoughts and for deciding what to do in the twinkling of an
eye.
An advocate is a human being and so are fact-finders. In the nature of these things,
perfection is not possible in either. “Counsel of perfection” has theological origins. It does not
derive from any advocate. The highest level to which any advocate can aspire is excellence.
Even that standard is elusive. The best cross-examination and final addresses are in reflection
after the case is over. No council worth his salt is ever fully satisfied.
Court work involves the advocate in all sorts of duties. If an advocate is free, it is his
duty to accept every case within his area of practice where a reasonable fee is offered. That
duty is sometimes referred to as the cab rank rule the metaphor is that the Advocate is like a

10
taxi which must accept anyone prepared to pay the fare. Every council has a duty to his client
fearlessly to raise every issue, advance every argument and ask every question, however
distasteful, which he thinks will help his client's case. Council must not mislead the court as
his ethical standard is expected to be high and because law is nothing but a mechanism to arrive
at truth. It is true that a lawyer to always conduct properly in a court of law and even his best
at all times. It is true that a lawyer should maintain the dignity of the court but the court also
has a reciprocal duty to perform and should not only be courteous to a lawyer but should also
try to maintain his respect in the eyes of law, his clients and the general public with whom he
has to deal in his professional capacity.

A good advocate will treat every case as the most important ever. It will be prepared
and conducted as if it is the last and the only one on which the advocate's reputation hangs - as
it does. There will be a different approach to each witness. The strategy is to be prepared to the
finest degree but the good advocate will watch the witness constantly and be ready to adapt the
plan and be alert for the opportunity to improvise. It will look effortless.

No knowledge is wasted in an advocacy although some knowledge is of more

immediate importance. It is worth developing a habit of acquiring particular forms of
knowledge. Every good advocate never stops learning.

11
4. CASE STUDIES: COMMENT ON THE FOLLOWING CASES.

Case 1:

BAR COUNCIL OF ANDHRA PRADESH

v/s

KURAPATI SATYANARAYANA

CITATION: AIR 2003 SC 175

CASE NUMBER: APPEAL (CIVIL) 3412 OF 2001

PETITIONER: BAR COUNCIL OF ANDHRA PRADESH

RESPONDENT: KURAPATI SATYANARAYANA

DATE: 15 NOVEMBER, 2002

BENCH: V. N. KHARE AND ASHOK BHAN

JUDGEMENT: ASHOK BHAN, J.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh has filed this appeal against the order of the
disciplinary committee of the bar council of India dated 28th March, 1999 by which the
Bar Council of India has set aside the order passed by the state bar council removing
the name of the Kurapati Satyanarayana from the roll of the state bar council as he was
found guilty of grave professional misconduct in the discharge of his duty as an
advocate.
2. Initially, O.S. No. 1624 of 1991 was filed by Shri Gutta Nagabhushanam on the file of
the Additional district Munsif Magistrate. Thesaid suit was decreed and the execution
petition number 112 of 1995 was instrued for the realization of the decretal amount.Mr.
K. Satyanarayana was engaged in as counsel by Shri G. Nagabhushanam the executive
proceedings.
3. Mr. K. Satyanarayan receive a total sum of Rs. 14,600/- on various dates stated in the
execution proceedings but he did not make payment of the same to Shri G.

12
 Nagabhushanam (complainant). Hence, on 18th October, 1996 the complainant filed a
complaint with the additional district Munsif magistrate, who then transferred the
matter to the Bar council of Andhra Pradesh.
4. The complaint was filed and important document were forwarded to the state bar
council and compliant chose not to file acounter. Hence, the matter went to its
disciplinary committee which after examining the witnesses produce came to the
conclusion that the Kurapati receive the total sum of Rs. 14,600/- belonging to the
complainant and retained the same with him. Hence, the discipline committee of the
state Bar council concluded that the Advocate had retained the money with him and
was thus guilty of “professional misconduct”. He was directed to return the money to
the complainant.
5. Kurapati asserted that he had informed the complainant through a post card about the
receipt of the decretal amount and that on 24th April 1996, he had paid Rs. 11,000/- to
the complainant. However, these were not accepted by the Disciplinary Committee as
Kurapati failed to produce any evidence proving the payment of Rs. 11,000/-
6. Kurapati then filed an appeal before the Disciplinary Committee of the BCI. The
Disciplinary Committee agreed with the finding of fact recorded by the State Bar
Council but came to the council conclusion that Kurapati did not commit any
professional misconduct though there might have been some negligence on his part.
7. Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of India observed that the conduct of Kurapati
never showed that he refused to return money. Perusal of file shows that he could not
make the payment due to his family circumstance and had utilized the money for his
treatment. The committee concluded that Kurapati didn’t wanted to misappropriate the
decretal amount and hence Bar Council of India set aside the State Bar Council’s order
holding that delinquent had not committed any professional misconduct though there
might have been some negligence on his part, which did not involve any moral
turpitude.
8. Bar council of Andhra Pradesh has filed this appeal against the aforesaid order of the
disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India.

13
ISSUES INVOLVED:

1. Whether or not retaining client’s money in this case by an advocate, amounts to

professional misconduct?
2. Whether or not in this case retaining client’s money is just negligence on the part of K.
Satyanarayana?
3. Whether or not K. Satyanarayana is guilty of professional misconduct?

ARGUMENT BY BOTH THE PARTIES:

▪ The appellant Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh filed appeal petition against the order of
the Bar Council of India which set aside its order of removing the name of K.
Satyanarayana from the State roll as it was of view that he committed one of the gravest
professional misconduct as he retained money belonging to Shri G. Nagabhushanam.
▪ The point which was raised by the respondent that the appeal filed by the Bar Council
of Andhra Pradesh is not maintainable as it is not the person aggrieved so this appeal is
not maintainable.

DECISION BY THE SUPREME COURT:

▪ Supreme Court said that the pleading of the point raised by the respondent that the
appeal filed by the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh is not maintainable need not be
dilated, as seven Judge Constitution Bench of this court held in Bar Council of
Maharashtra v/s. M. V. Dabholkar and others, 1975 (2) SCC 702, that the role of Bar
council is of dual capacity, one as the prosecutor through its Executive Committee and
the other quasi-judicial performed through its Disciplinary Committee.
▪ The Supreme Court said that the finding of Bar Council of India that there was no
intention on the part of the advocate to misappropriate the money of his client was not
only "unfounded and perverse" but also lacked serious thought which was to be given
to disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India in discharge of quasi-judicial
functions while probing into such grave instances.

14
 ▪ Further it was neither pleaded nor shown that Kurapati was in dire financial difficulty
promoting him to utilize the decretal amount for his treatment which was with him in
trust. This is an act of breach of trust and was a frivolous and unsustainable excuse.
▪ It was observed that, “Among the different types of misconduct envisaged for a legal
practitioner misappropriation of the client’s money must be regarded as one of the
gravest.”
▪ Setting aside BCI’s order, the Bench said that, “the conduct of delinquent is
reprehensible of an advocate and claiming to have practiced for three decades and
worked as Government advocate for four years should have been guilty of such serious
misconduct.
▪ Hence, the Supreme Court has upheld order of the Andhra Pradesh Bar council
removing the name of a lawyer from its rolls after he was found guilty of “grave
professional misconduct” in the discharge of his duties and also the appellant shall be
entitled to the costs of this appeal, which was assessed as Rs. 5,000/-.

CONCLUSION:
For concluding this case, it would be more appropriate for stating the wordings of the
bench that, “adherence to correct professional conduct in the discharge of one’s duties as an
advocate is the backbone of the legal system. Any laxity while judging the misconduct which
is not bona fide and dishonest advocate would undermine the confidence of the litigant public
resulting in the collapse of the legal system.”

15
Case 2:
P.D. GUPTA
v/s
RAM MURTI AND ANOTHER
CITATION: AIR 1998 SC 283
PETITIONER: P.D. GUPTA
RESPONDENT: RAM MURTI AND ANOTHER
DATE: 8 JULY, 1997
BENCH: S.C. AGRAWAL AND D.P. WADHWA
JUDGEMENT: D. P WADHWA, J.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. Appellant is an advocate practicing in Delhi. He has filed this appeal under section 38
of the Advocates Act, 1961 against the order dated May 4th, 1996 of the Disciplinary
Committee of Bar Council of India holding him guilty of misconduct and suspending
him from practice for a period of one year. The proceedings had been transferred to the
Bar Council of India under section 36B of the Act, as the Disciplinary Committee of
Bar Council of Delhi could not dispose of the complaint received by it within one year.
Section 36B enjoins upon the Disciplinary Committee of State Bar Council to dispose
of the complaint received by it under section 35 of the Act expeditiously and in any
case to conclude the proceedings within one year from the date of receipt of complaint
or date of initiation of proceeding at instance of State Bar Council.
2. One Shrikishan Dass died on January 05, 1980, leaving behind extensive properties.
One Vidyawati claiming to be the sister and the only legal heir of Srikishan Dass filed
a petition in February 1980, under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act in the court
of District Judge, Delhi for grant of probate/letters of administration to the estate of
deceased Das. The complainant Ram Murti and other two persons laid claim to
properties of deceased claiming to be heirs and propounding three different wills. They
also filed separate proceeding under section 276 of Indian Succession Act before the
District Judge, Delhi.
3. Vidyawati had prayed for a decree of injunction against the defendants restraining them
from trespassing into property. She also sought a declaration that she was the absolute
owner of the property. This suit was pending before Delhi High Court. P.D. Gupta
advocate had been her counsel throughout. The complaint alleged against him is that
16
 though he knew that there was doubt cast on the right of Vidyawati inheriting the
properties of Dass on account of pendency of various proceedings and complainant had
alleged that her claim to be sister of Shrikishan Dass was false, yet P.D. Gupta
purchased ground floor of the property from her by sale deed dated December 30, 1982.

ISSUES INVOLVED:

1. How could an advocate purchase property from his client, which is a subject matter of
dispute between the parties in a court of law?
2. Is P.D. Gupta guilty of professional or other misconduct?
3. If so, was the punishment awarded to him by Bar Council of Indiai.e., suspension from
practice for a period of one year, disproportionate to professional or other misconduct
of which he was found guilty?
4. Is an appeal by advocate, against the order of the disciplinary committee of Bar Council
of India stating that the conduct of the advocate was patently unbecoming of a lawyer
and against professional ethics, maintainable or not?

ARGUMENTS OF THE CASE:

▪ The explanation given by P.D. Gupta is that though Vidyawati was step-sister of
Shrikishan Dass but the latter always treated her like her real sister. Vidyawati herself
died and is stated to be survived by her only daughter Maya Devi who is now dead.
Before her death, Vidyawati executed a will in favor of Anand Bansal, son of Maya
Devi, bequeathing him the property. P.D. Gupta filed affidavit of Anand Bansal
claiming that sale deed executed by Vidyawati in favor of P.D. Gupta and his son-in-
law Suresh Kumar Gupta were without any pressure and complaint filed by Ram
Murthy is wrong and does not stand.
▪ The sale deed executed in favor of P.D. Gupta shows that agreement to sale was entered
September 3, 1980. Other sale deed dated December 2, 1982 was executed in favor of
son-in-law P.D. Gupta. Vidyawati had let out second floor of property to Suraj Gupta.
This Suresh Gupta, son-in-law of P.D. Gupta is no other person than son of Suraj Gupta.

JUDGEMENT OF SUPREME COURT:

17
▪ The Bar Council of India, through its disciplinary committee, considered all relevant
circumstances and thus the court came to the conclusion that P. D. Gupta, advocate is
guilty of misconduct.
▪ P. D. Gupta was awarded with the punishment of suspension from practice for a period
of one year.
▪ The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

CONCLUSION:

Administration of Justice is stream which has to be kept pure and clean. No one should
be able to raise a finger about the conduct of a lawyer. Here, P. D. Gupta in buying the
property has in effect subverted the process of Justice. His action has raised serious
questions about his fairness in the conduct of the trial touching his professional conduct as
an advocate. By his action he has bought the process of administration of justice disrepute.

18