TC- 5

MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT ROHINI, DELHI

CIVIL SUIT NO. ___/20XX

UNDER SECTION 15 OF THE CPC

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE BANK OF
INDIA…………………………… …. PETITIONER
V.
AMIT………………………… RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

 MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

|MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………..……..……3

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………………….……4

3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION…………………………………………………..…..6

4. STATEMENT OF FACTS………………………………………………...….....…..……..7

5. STATEMENT OF ISSUES…...……………………………………………………….......8

6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…………………………………………………......…...9

7. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED………………………………………………………....…..10

ISSUE I
Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of bailment
and if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had sufficiently
discharged his duties as Bailee?

ISSUE II

Whether the case files fall in the definition of “Goods”?

ISSUE III

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

8. PRAYER……………………………………………………………………………….......13
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 2
MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

|MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATION ACTUAL TERM

AIR ALL INDIA REPORTER

CPC CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

SC SUPREME COURT

SCC SUPREME COURT CASES

V. VERSUS

LTD. LIMITED

NO. NUMBER

RESPONDENT
 HON’BLE HONOURABLE

SEC. SECTION

MEMORIAL FOR 3
 MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

LEGAL PRECEDENTS
INDIAN CASES
S NO. CASE NAME CITATION PAGE NO.

1. Lalchand Ramchand V. Pyare AIR1971MP245 11

Dasrath Chamar and Anr

2. Groom v Cheese wright [1895] 1 Ch 730 12

3 A.K. Bijili Sahib v. Dadhamia A1R 1936 Mad 48 12

.
Bhalambai

STATUTES

SNO. STATUTES

1. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 SECTION 15

2. INDIAN CONTRACT ACT 1872 SECTION 171

3. SALE OF GOODS ACT 1930 SECTION 2(7)

RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL FOR 4
MOOT COURT FOR PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

DATABASE

SN DATABASE REFERRED
O.
1. Corrie, Priyasha. (2007). Advocate's Lien: A
Critical Review of the Stance in India. SSRN
Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.1316289.

2. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/
article10665-case-summary-r-d-saxena-v-s-
balramprasad-sharma-air-2000-
sc2912.html#google_vignette

3. www.scconline.com

4. www.manupatra.com
MEMORIAL FOR 5

MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024 |MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA HEREBY HUMBLY
SUBMIT TO

THIS HON’BLE COURT’S JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 15 OF THE CODE

OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908: -

Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade competent to try it

RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 6
 MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024 |MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF
RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF FACTS

BACKGROUND

Mr. Amit, a senior advocate was appointed by the State Bank of India as its legal advisor. His
role included representing the bank in cases before Delhi High Court. Mr. Amit provided his
services to the bank for approximately three years and within that tenure it was found that he
remained absent from court hearings. Some files that were handed over to him were also found to
be damp and damaged due to rats.

DISPUTE

The bank was dissatisfied with his service and sent him a termination notice through bank
manager. The bank appointed Mr. Arjun as new legal advisor. On receiving the notice, instead of
returning the bank’s files he forwarded a consolidated bill of Rs.2,50,000 as balance payable for
his legal remuneration. However, the bank considered this amount excessive and issued a cheque
of Rs.1,50,000 as remuneration and requested him to return the files so that it can be handed over
to Mr. Arjun. Amit refused to return the files until he receives full remuneration and stated that he
had right of lien over the case files, citing his three years of skilful work. Due to Mr. Amit refusal
to return the files, the court passed adverse orders against the bank in one of the cases

SUIT INITIATION

The bank aggrieved by this filed a case against Mr. Amit’s actions requesting the court to direct
Mr. Amit to return the files that are with him and his act of not returning the files amounts to
professional misconduct.
MEMORIAL OF RESPONDENT 7
MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

-ISSUE I-

Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of
bailment and if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had
sufficiently discharged his duties as Bailee?

-ISSUE II-

Whether the case files fall in the definition of “Goods”?

-ISSUE III-

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 8
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

It is most respectfully submitted;

The bank and my client entered the contract of bailment by delivery of goods that is transfer of
possession to him. Because he has possession of that files that are goods and because there is a
possession of good therefore, he has duty as a bailee to take care of goods and it is a movable
property. Additionally, all the essential that are mentioned under section 148 of Indian
constitution are fulfilled therefore there is a contract of bailment.

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

It is most respectfully submitted; The advocates do have right of lien over the case files entrusted
to them as they fall under the preview of the “Goods” as they can be bought and sold. Secondly
when the Contract Act was made it was taken into consideration that word lien extends to the
case files and documents. This was done to ensure that advocates get security for the skilful work
they provide to their clients. Retention of the case files do not restrict the clients right under
Article 22(1) and it also does not amount to professional misconduct by just exercising the right
of lien.

RESPONDENT
 MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

9
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of bailment and
if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had sufficiently discharged his
duties as Bailee?

It is most respectfully submitted;

As per the essential element of bailment under section 148 there is transfer of goods from bank to
Amit. Thus, it proves that the bank while handing the case files to Amit gave its temporary
possession to him which means that there exists bailment and there is some purpose behind the
delivery of goods from bank to Amit. The purpose is to represent the bank in the cases and
provide legal services.

It states that the files were transfer to Amit (Advocate) for a specific purpose, such as providing
legal advice and representing in the court. When the goods are transferred one to another for
some purpose it means other party whom the goods are transfer have a possession or a control on
it during bailment. Similarly, the advocate exercised control over the entrusted files during the
course of legal representation thus fulfilling essentials of bailment.

This control is indicative of a bailment, where the bailee (advocate) has temporary possession and
responsibility for the goods (files) belonging to the bailor (client). According to the section 148 of
 Indian contact act goods must be returned to the owner. Therefore, the respondent highlighted after
the accomplishment of purpose goods must be return only after the when bailee recover necessary
expenses incurred on bailment or if any loss occurred due to the misconduct of bailor, bailee have
a right to recover compensation and if the bailor denied to compensate then bailee have a right to
lien over the files means keep that property until he receives remuneration.

Therefore, respondent contended that the bank did not pay the bill or the balanced amount that is
why he has a right to keep that file until the payment is done according to 171(right to lien on the
goods bailed).

By due consideration of the above stated provisions and statutes and the analysis done it can be
concluded that there was a contract of bailment that was done between both the parties.

MEMORIAL FOR PETIONER

10 MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

It is most respectfully submitted;

Firstly, the question as to whether the right of lien under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act,
1872 which mentions ‘Attorney’s Lien’ extends to Advocates or not has been clarified. In case of
Lalchand Ramchand V. Pyare Dasrath Chamar and Anr 1 where the court assumed for the purpose
of the case that ‘advocates’ fell under the ambit of ‘Attorneys’ with respect to Section 171 of the
Indian Contract Act, 1872 therefore they do have right of lien over the case files.

Case files can be classified as goods under section 2(7) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. An
attorney’s lien has always been used in the context of case brief and papers apart from other
articles like documents, deeds etc. This makes it evident that the right of lien is being referred to
the case files and the documents. It becomes apparent that ‘goods’ is of such a wide import that
case briefs also fall under the purview of this category since it is capable of being bought and
sold.

RESPONDENT
 The intention of the legislature with respect to the term ‘lien’ in the context of ‘Attorney’ has to
be to include case files. The Indian Contract Act, 1872 was framed by the British and the
principles of common law would have been taken into consideration at that point of time. it
becomes clear that the lien intended would have been to include case files, the possession of
which ordinarily lies with an advocate and over which he could exercise a lien. The purpose of an
attorney’s lien also has been to secure the interests of an unpaid attorney and to prevent “lawyer
shopping” to the extent that the attorney’s interests is harmed. Justice Sethi states that an
advocate does not have lien over the case files but he has lien over deeds, cheques etc. but this
seems to be in contradiction since these documents are part of the case files and the instances of
documents like deeds, bills of exchange ending up in hands of advocates as a form of security is
very rare. The intention of the legislature could thus not have been restricted in nature.

The right of lien is the best solution for remitting a lawyer. The argument that advocate can
institute a suit for his unpaid fee proves impractical in that suing a client is liable to damage the
reputation of the advocate. Who wants to be known as the attorney who sues their clients?
Instead of suing a client for fees, the attorney may assert a lien for attorney’s fees. There is no
express provision that provides for lien over litigation files. Now just because Rules 28 and 29 of
the Bar Council of India Rules do not provide for an advocate’s lien and that these clauses merely
provide for deducting the money of the client at the hand of the advocate,

1
AIR1971MP245 11
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL OF RESPONDENT

the same does not prevent the application of other sections from other Acts which provide an
indication of the existence of an advocate’s lien. Besides, a situation could arise where the
attorney had no such money as security with him and this aspect has not been accounted for by
the Bar Council. It is here Section 171 comes to the rescue. Right of lien does not restrict art.
22(1). The court in this case held that there was violation of Art 22(1). This argument is
erroneous because the advocate has retained the goods to only get his unpaid fee from the client
and does not prevent the client from employing another lawyer.

Does withholding the files from the client amount to professional misconduct? There is no
dispute as to the proposition that law is a noble profession and that it is of utmost importance to
foster the trust of the public in the judiciary. Thus, it is imperative that instances of professional
misconduct are minimized and a stringent stand is taken against the same. However, it is hard to
conceive that exercising a right of lien would amount to misconduct. Why is it that this right is
 exercised? This is due to the default of the client in not remitting the lawyer. Retaining the case
files by the advocate as security against the payment of the fees can in no way amount to
misconduct and is merely a safeguard adopted by the advocate. Imagine a situation where the
advocate remains unpaid and the right of lien is also taken away from him. The client’s
propensity would be to turn complacent and he would take longer time than required to fulfil his
obligations of remitting the advocate. This would be highly prejudicial to the interests of the
advocate who instead of availing his right, has to file a suit for receiving remuneration which
would in turn result in further expenses for the advocate. It must be borne in mind that the
advocate has performed his duty of putting his efforts into the preparation of the case files and
the arguments and he should be remunerated for his time and effort. In the case of Groom v
Cheese wright1, Kekewich J stated 'it is only common justice that when a solicitor has expended
his brains and time and resources in working for a client, he should be paid out for the use of his
industry and skill'. Advocates who have just started practicing and who generally suffer from
insufficient funds will bear the brunt of this excessively rigorous provision. In another case of
A.K. Bijili Sahib v. Dadhamia Bhalambai2, the aspect of professional misconduct was broached.
It was held that a pleader who retains the papers of his client because his fees were not paid in
full does not act wrongly as to commit misconduct. The reason was not stated but the Court
explained that when an advocate acts in accordance with law, it would not amount to misconduct.
And thus, there was no professional misconduct on the part of advocate and he had right to
exercise right of lien under section 177 of the Indian Contract Act.

MEMORIAL FOR MOOT COURT 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is most

respectfully prayed that:

The case files should be returned to the SBI.

Amit should pay damages for the loss suffered by SBI due to the adverse orders that were passed
against the bank in one of cases as the required case files couldn’t be handed over to Mr. Arjun
for appearing before the court.

1 [1895] 1 Ch 730
2 A1R 1936 Mad 48 12
RESPONDENT
 All of which respectfully submitted

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE RESPONDENT SHALL DUTY BOUND

FOREVER PRAY.

On Behalf of the RESPONDENT

Counsel for RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

13
 MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

|MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………..……..……3

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………………….……4

3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION…………………………………………………..…..6

4. STATEMENT OF FACTS………………………………………………...….....…..……..7

5. STATEMENT OF ISSUES…...……………………………………………………….......8

6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…………………………………………………......…...9

7. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED………………………………………………………....…..10

ISSUE I
Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of bailment
and if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had sufficiently
discharged his duties as Bailee?

ISSUE II

Whether the case files fall in the definition of “Goods”?

ISSUE III

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

8. PRAYER……………………………………………………………………………….......13

RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 2
MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

|MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATION ACTUAL TERM

AIR ALL INDIA REPORTER

CPC CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

SC SUPREME COURT

SCC SUPREME COURT CASES

V. VERSUS

LTD. LIMITED

NO. NUMBER
 HON’BLE HONOURABLE

SEC. SECTION

MEMORIAL FOR 3

RESPONDENT
 MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

LEGAL PRECEDENTS
INDIAN CASES
S NO. CASE NAME CITATION PAGE NO.

1. Lalchand Ramchand V. Pyare AIR1971MP245 11

Dasrath Chamar and Anr

2. Groom v Cheese wright [1895] 1 Ch 730 12

3. A.K. Bijili Sahib v. Dadhamia A1R 1936 Mad 48 12

Bhalambai

4. RD SAXENA V BALRAM AIR2000 SC 2912

PRASAD

STATUTES

SNO. STATUTES

1. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 SECTION 15

2. INDIAN CONTRACT ACT 1872 SECTION 171

3. SALE OF GOODS ACT 1930 SECTION 2(7)

RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL FOR 4
MOOT COURT FOR PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

DATABASE

SN DATABASE REFERRED
O.
1. Corrie, Priyasha. (2007). Advocate's Lien: A
Critical Review of the Stance in India. SSRN
Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.1316289.

2. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/
article10665-case-summary-r-d-saxena-v-s-
balramprasad-sharma-air-2000-
sc2912.html#google_vignette

3. www.scconline.com

4. www.manupatra.com

RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL FOR 5

MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024 |MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA HEREBY HUMBLY
SUBMIT TO

THIS HON’BLE COURT’S JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 15 OF THE CODE

OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908: -

Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade competent to try it
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 6

RESPONDENT
 MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024 |MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF FACTS

BACKGROUND

Mr. Amit, a senior advocate was appointed by the State Bank of India as its legal advisor. His role
included representing the bank in cases before Delhi High Court. Mr. Amit provided his services
to the bank for approximately three years and within that tenure it was found that he remained
absent from court hearings. Some files that were handed over to him were also found to be damp
and damaged due to rats.

DISPUTE

The bank was dissatisfied with his service and sent him a termination notice through bank
manager. The bank appointed Mr. Arjun as new legal advisor. On receiving the notice, instead of
returning the bank’s files he forwarded a consolidated bill of Rs.2,50,000 as balance payable for
his legal remuneration. However, the bank considered this amount excessive and issued a cheque
of Rs.1,50,000 as remuneration and requested him to return the files so that it can be handed over
to Mr. Arjun. Amit refused to return the files until he receives full remuneration and stated that he
had right of lien over the case files, citing his three years of skilful work. Due to Mr. Amit refusal
to return the files, the court passed adverse orders against the bank in one of the cases

SUIT INITIATION

The bank aggrieved by this filed a case against Mr. Amit’s actions requesting the court to direct
Mr. Amit to return the files that are with him and his act of not returning the files amounts to
professional misconduct.
MEMORIAL OF RESPONDENT 7
MOOT COURT PSDA, 2024

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

-ISSUE I-

Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of
bailment and if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had
sufficiently discharged his duties as Bailee?

-ISSUE II-

Whether the case files fall in the definition of “Goods”?

-ISSUE III-

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?
MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 8
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

The respondent’s argument centers on the nature of his engagement with the Bank and the legal
implications of his possession of the case files. He posits that the transfer of files for legal services
does not inherently create a bailment, as there must be a clear agreement on the terms of possession.
Even if a bailment were assumed, Mr. Amit maintains that he has fulfilled his professional duties and
any damage to the files was outside his control. He concludes that the Bank's failure to pay the full
amount justifies his lien on the files under Section 171, and that the relationship between him and the
Bank indeed constitutes a bailment, allowing him to retain the files until full payment is received.

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

9
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

Whether the entrustment of files by Bank to the advocate resulted in the creation of bailment and
if yes, what are the duties of Mr. Amit as a bailee and whether he had sufficiently discharged his
duties as Bailee?

A. Creation of Bailment:

The mere entrustment of case files to Mr. Amit does not necessarily establish bailment. Bailment
requires an agreement between the parties, explicit or implicit, regarding the purpose and terms of
the transfer of possession.

Mr. Amit's role as a legal advisor to the Bank involved the handling of case files for the purpose of
representing the Bank's interests in legal proceedings. This does not automatically imply bailment,
but rather a professional engagement for legal services.

B. Duties of Mr. Amit as a Bailee:

Assuming arguendo that bailment exists, Mr. Amit's duties as a bailee are contingent upon the
terms of the agreement between him and the Bank.

As a legal advisor, Mr. Amit exercised his skills and expertise in representing the Bank's interests
to the best of his abilities, fulfilling his duty to provide competent legal services.

Any alleged damages to the case files, if proven, were beyond Mr. Amit's control and cannot be
attributed to negligence on his part.

CONCLUSION:

The argument presented by the plantiff are unsubstantiated and lack merit , respondent contended
that the bank did not pay the bill or the balanced amount that is why he has the right to keep that
file until the payment is done according to section 171 which is the right to lien on the goods
bailed . By the due consideration of the provisions and statutes it can be stated that there was a
relationship of bailment.

MEMORIAL FOR PETIONER 10

MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

WHETHER THE CASE FILES FALL IN THE DEFINITION OF GOODS

The definition of "goods" under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 encompasses every kind of movable property
except actionable claims and money. This definition has been interpreted broadly by courts, and it includes
items that are capable of being bought and sold. Therefore, case files, being movable property like
documents or papers, can be considered "goods" under this definition. Courts have recognized the expansive
scope of the term "goods," and given that case files are tangible and can be exchanged, they fall within this
category.

1
AIR1971MP245 11
MOOT COURT PSDA 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

ARGUMENT ADVANCED

DEFINITION

“goods” means every kind of moveable property other than actionable claims and money; and
includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass, and things attached to or forming part of the land
which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of sale.

SCOPE OF TERM GOOD

Section 2(7) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 provides the definition to the term “Goods” to mean
“every kind of moveable property other than actionable claims and money” .The word ‘goods’ is
of very general and quite indefinite import, and primarily derives its meaning from the context in
which it is used. An attorney’s lien has always been used in the context of case brief and papers
apart from other articles like documents, deeds etc.

The scope of the term has been expanding over recent judicial decisions It becomes apparent that
‘goods’ is of such a wide import that case briefs also falls under the purview of this category since
it is capable of being bought and sold.

MEMORIAL FOR MOOT COURT 2024

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT
Whether the advocates have a right of lien over case files entrusted to them?

Sec 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 clearly states that; “Bankers, factors, wharfingers,
attorneys of a High Court and policy-brokers may, in the absence of a contract to the contrary,
retain as security for a general balance of the account, any goods bailed to them; but no other
persons have a right to retain, as a security for such balance, goods bailed to them unless there is
an express contract to that effect”; and hence he can have a lien on litigants paper

in case of Lalchand Ramchand V. Pyare Dasrath Chamar and Anr1 where the court assumed for
the purpose of the case that ‘advocates’ fell under the ambit of ‘Attorneys’ with respect to Section
171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 therefore they do have right of lien over the case files.
Case files can be classified as goods under section 2(7) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. An
attorney’s lien has always been used in the context of case brief and papers apart from other
articles like documents, deeds etc. This makes it evident that the right of lien is being referred to
the case files and the documents. It becomes apparent that ‘goods’ is of such a wide import that
case briefs also fall under the purview of this category since it is capable of being bought and sold.

The right of lien is the best solution for remitting a lawyer. The argument that advocate can
institute a suit for his unpaid fee proves impractical in that suing a client is liable to damage the
reputation of the advocate. Who wants to be known as the attorney who sues their clients? Instead
of suing a client for fees, the attorney may assert a lien for attorney’s fees. There is no express
provision that provides for lien over litigation files. Now just because Rules 28 and 29 of the Bar
Council of India Rules do not provide for an advocate’s lien and that these clauses merely provide
for deducting the money of the client at the hand of the advocate,
In another case of A.K. Bijili Sahib v. Dadhamia Bhalambai3 , the aspect of professional
misconduct was broached. It was held that a pleader who retains the papers of his client because
his fees were not paid in full does not act wrongly as to commit misconduct. The reason was not
stated but the Court explained that when an advocate acts in accordance with law, it would not
amount to misconduct. And thus, there was no professional misconduct on the part of advocate
and he had right to exercise right of lien under section 177 of the India

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is most

respectfully prayed that:

The case files should be returned to the SBI.

Amit should pay damages for the loss suffered by SBI due to the adverse orders that were passed
against the bank in one of cases as the required case files couldn’t be handed over to Mr. Arjun for
appearing before the court.
 All of which respectfully submitted

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE RESPONDENT SHALL DUTY BOUND

FOREVER PRAY.

On Behalf of the RESPONDENT

Counsel for RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT 13