- (1.) K. C. Agrawal, J. This appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (w) of the Civil P. C. has been preferred by the Bar Council of India against the judgment of First Additional Civil Judge, Kanpur, dated 14th August, 1975, reviewing an order deciding issue No. 13 against the respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE facts of this case briefly stated are these. Sri Manikant Tewari, respondent No. 1, was enrolled as an Advocate in the Bombay High Court in December, 1946 and after having practised for a short time within the jurisdiction of that Court, he shifted to Kanpur, where, admittedly, he has been ever since practising within the jurisdiction of Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh. On 23rd July, 1962, M/s. Ram Lal and Bros. through Sri Kunj Behari Lal Tandon and Brij Behari Lal Tandon made the complaint of professional misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act against respondent No. 1. THE case was referred by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to its Disciplinary Committee for necessary action. Respondent No. 1 did not appear on 21st Feb. 1965, when the case was taken up by the Disciplinary Committee. THE Committee, however, thought that as his presence was necessary, it adjourned the case, which was fixed thereafter for 1st August, 1965. Respondent No. 1 did not appear even on that date. Having found the respondent No. 1 guilty of professional misconduct, the U. P. Bar Council suspended him from practice for one year. Against this order of the U. P. Bar Council, an appeal was preferred by respondent No. 1 before the Bar Council of India. On 30th April, 1966, the Bar Council of India not only dismissed the appeal of the respondent No. 1 but also modified the punishment by enhancing the period of suspension from one year to five years. The respondent No. 1 appears to have preferred an appeal to the Supreme Court under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 against the said Judgment which was dismissed for non- prosecution on 30th March, 1967. The order of the Supreme Court is reproduced below:- "the matter abovementioned being called on for orders before this Court on the 30th day of March, 1967. This Court in the absence of the parties DOTH ORDER that the appeal above-mentioned by and (Sic) prosecution. Witness the Hon'ble Mr. Koka Subba Rao, Chief Justice of India at the Supreme Court, New Delhi, the 30th day of March, 1967. " Challenging the validity of the order of suspension passed by the U. P. Bar Council and that of the Bar Council of India, respondent No. 1 filed Suit No. 176 of 1970. In this suit, he impleaded a number of persons as defendants including those two against whom allegations of mala fides were levelled by respondent No. 1 in petting respondent No. 1 suspended as defendants 16 and 17. The respondent No. 1 had claimed the reliefs of injunction as well as for damages.
(3.) THE suit was contested by the Bar Council of India on a number of grounds. On the pleadings, the Trial Court framed a number of issues. Out of those issues, the two which are required to be mentioned at this stage were issues 5 and 13, which are as under:- "5. Whether defendant No. 16 influenced the decisions of the disciplinary committee of defendants 4 and 8 ? 13. Has court no jurisdiction to try the suit ?";