- (1.) This appeal under section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 is directed against an order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India dated August 31, 1977 holding the appellant guilty of professional misconduct and directing his suspension from practice for a period of three months with effect from October 1, 1977.
(2.) It appears that the respondent No. 2 Smt. Chandan Bala filed a claim for compensation on account of the death of her husband as a result of a motor accident in the Court of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Delhi. She made a complaint to the State Bar Council of Delhi that she had engaged the appellant, a lawyer practising in the Tis Hazari Court, as her counsel on a fee of Rs. 55/- and that he had thereafter took from her a sum of Rs. 83/- towards expenditure for stamps et cetera, Rs. 37.50 p. towards publishing charges, Rs. 31/- for payment of process fee and Rs. 33/- as charges for taking copies of certain documents. Her grievance was that the appellant did not deposit Rs. 37.50 p. in the Court towards publication charges nor did he deposit Rs. 31/- towards process fee as no process was taken out by him or applied for any copies of documents for which he had taken Rs. 33/-. She further alleged that he duped her by taking Rs. 642/- stating that Rs. 621/- had to he credited into the treasury towards income-tax on the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and Rs. 21/- as expenses, and that later on he represented to her that the said amount had been credited into the treasury.
(3.) The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India has on a consideration of the testimony of one Devendra Kumar, Advocate, CW 1, Prakash Chand, CW 2, Smt. Chandan Bala, CW 3 and Madan Lal, CW 4 found that the appellant committed a breach of rules 25 and 30 of the Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 in that he failed to maintain accounts and that he failed to furnish the said accounts when demanded of him. The testimony of these witnesses tend to show that the appellant represented that the Tribunal had made an award for Rs. 1,80,000/- as compensation and that on the faith of such representation, Smt. Chandan Bala was made to part with Rs. 642/- which, he claimed, had to be credited into the treasury as income-tax payable thereon and expenses incidental thereto. Their evidence further shows that the amount was obtained by the appellant on false pretences as the claim was still pending and had not been decreed by the Tribunal. The Disciplinary Committee was inclined to believe the version of Smt. Channan Bala that she was made to part with Rs. 600/- and odd towards income-tax but since the source from which the money came was not proved, did not take that into account. Nevertheless the fact remains that the appellant was guilty of breach of rs. 25 and 30. Under r. 25, a lawyer has to keep detailed accounts of the money entrusted by his client and the account must show the amounts received from the client or on his behalf, the expenses incurred for him and the debits made on account of fees with respective dates and all other necessary particulars. By r. 30, a lawyer must furnish a copy of the client's accounts to him on demand on payment of the copying charges. These are the salutary provisions made for the protection of the litigant public, as instances are not uncommon where lawyers withhold large sums of money without any reasonable excuse. In Civil Appeal No. 2385 (NCM) of 1977 - K.V. Umro v. Smt. Venubai D. Osco & Anr. decided on July 20, 1983 , we had the instance of a lawyer who misappropriated an amount of Rs. 11,760.70 p. awarded by the Court under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 payable to a poor helpless widow as compensation for the death of her husband in a road accident. It is unfortunate that such instances should occur which bring bad name to the legal profession and tarnish the image of our entire legal system. The relation between a lawyer and his client is highly fiduciary in its nature and-of very delicate, exacting and confidential character requiring a high degree of fidelity and good faith. It is purely a personal relationship, involving the highest personal trust and confidence. A lawyer when entrusted with a brief is expected to follow the norms of professional ethics and try to protect the interests of his clients in relation to whom he occupies a position of trust. The appellant betrayed the trust reposed in him by the complainant and defalcated the various amounts entrusted to him.;