sriramabhaskar (jr.advocate) 10 April 2010
1. if suppose court order under order21 rule 43 attachmebnt (movables) at the time of execution of the warrant by amin of the court the DHR apperience is very necessary thare to take custody of the movables. At that time DHR instated the advocate to come. Is this professional misconduct. Enlighten
Adv. G. A. Gagdani (ADVOCATE AND LEGAL CONSULTANT) 10 April 2010
look it has been general practise even your client will like to be present at such occassion.
If an advocate does not want to be present at that point of time its okay, it does not amount's to professional misconduct, it will amount to professional misconduct when DHR asks for bribing
Your presence is not required absolutely. When the Court issues warrant for attachment of movables, your client or his representative alone is required to accompany the bailiff to identify movables and the judgment debtor. You may give complaint against the bailiff to the Nazir (Head of the bailiff section) and also the Registrar of the concerned Court that you are being used as a tool for illegal designs of the bailiff.
N RAMESH. (Advocate Chennai. Formerly Civil Judge. Mobile.09444261613) 10 April 2010
It cannot be said as professional mis-conduct.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
