DINENDRA NATH DUTT (A MINOR) Vs. THWILSON
LAWS(PVC)-1901-2-22
PRIVY COUNCIL
Decided on February 06,1901

DINENDRA NATH DUTT (A MINOR) Appellant
VERSUS
THWILSON Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Maclean, C J - (1.) This is a summons taken out by the infant-plaintiff in the suit asking for an order that upon payment of their taxed costs including the costs of, and incidental to, this application, to Messrs. Wilson, Chatterjee and Mitter, the attorneys on the record for the plaintiff, the name of Babu Priya Nath Sen be placed on the record in the said suit as such attorney for the plaintiff, with directions for taxing the costs.
(2.) Upon that summons being served upon them, the solicitors, Messrs. Wilson & Co., intimated to the plaintiff's solicitor that they should appear by counsel at the hearing of the applications and, in consequence apparently of that intimation, the plaintiff said that he would file an affidavit showing grounds of application, and in consequence a long affidavit was filed on behalf of the plaintiff making certain charges against the solicitors, and that affidavit was replied to by the solicitors in repudiation of the charges. The matter came on under these circumstances before Mr. Justice Pratt, then sitting as a vacation Judge.
(3.) Mr. Justice Pratt following, and properly following, certain decisions of this Court to the effect that the next friend of an infant-plaintiff was not entitled to change his solicitors unless he could satisfy the Court that either owing to the misconduct of the solicitor or for some other cause the change was for the benefit of the infant, dismissed the application with costs. Hence the present appeal by the plaintiff through his next friend, who is his father. There is nothing to indicate that the father is actuated by any improper or sinister motive in desiring to change his solicitors, nor has anything been said against the solicitor whom he desires to appoint.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.