- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 12-9-95 (decree signed on 23-9-95) passed in Money Suit No. 11/88 by learned Sub-Judge-II, dhanbad whereby the appellants' suit was dismissed.
(2.) THE suit was filed by the plaintiff, Mr. M. M. Verma (deceased), for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,67,852. 19 claimed to be due as a professional fee and clerkage against the respondents. The plaintiffs had also claimed interest @ 18% and the cost of the suit.
(3.) THE case of the original plaintiff in brief is that :- (i) He was appointed as a counsel by the coal Controller, by his letter dated 27-8-75 on behalf of the Ministry of Energy, department of Coal, Union of India, to conduct the cases before the Court of the Commissioner of Payments as also before the Appellate courts. According to the terms of appointment, his professional fee was to be paid at the rates allowed by the Government of Bihar. (ii) According to the plaintiff, large number of claims were made by hundreds of ex-colliery-owners under the provisions of the coking Coal Mines (Nationalization) Act, 1972 before the Commissioner of Payments appointed under the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalization), act, 1972. He appeared and worked for the respondents in those cases to safeguard the interest of the Union of India. (iii) The Government of Bihar fixed the professional fee of the plaintiff, at the maximum rate of 10% of the value of the claim cases, as per rule 28 (1) of the High Court's Circular, vide Memo No. 5153 dated 11-9-81 issued by the Additional Secretary, Law and justice Department, State of Bihar. (iv) After disposal of the cases the original plaintiff had sent his bills of professional fee, to the Coal Controller, at Calcutta through the Coal Superintendent, Dhanbad making request for payment of the bills. (v) The first bill (Ext. 5/c) was raised by the plaintiff at the maximum rate of fee of 10% in accordance with the rate fixed by the government of Bihar. The said rate of fee is 10% of the valuation of the claim cases. The said bill was accepted and the amount was paid to the original plaintiff by the Coal Controller, through an account payee cheque. (vi) Surprisingly, the subsequent bills raised on the said basis were at first kept pending for a long time and thereafter were referred to the Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna seeking advice of Law department in regard to the rate of fees payable in such cases by the Government. (vii) The attempt was to deliberately delay the payment of the plaintiff's bills. Although, earlier bill of the plaintiff was cleared 10% of the valuation of the claim, subsequent bills were withheld as aforesaid. (viii) The Law Department, Govt. of Bihar, called for certain details in regard to conducting of cases by the plaintiff and considered the same. Law Department by Memo no. 5152 dated 11-9-81, then replied to the coal Controller and advised to pay the plaintiff's fee at the maximum rate, on the valuation to be calculated as per the State government circulars. The Coal Controller in spite of the same failed to clear the bills. (ix) According to the original plaintiff, he had not only conducted the claim cases before the commissioner of Payments, but had also conducted the miscellaneous appeals before the district Judge, Dhanbad as well as a Labour Court, Case No. 1/1979 for which the bills for fee were raised on daily basis, which also remained unattended. The plaintiff sent several reminders and made several requests to clear the bills, but neither the payment was made nor any reason was assigned to the plaintiff. (x) The original plaintiff, thereafter, served a statutory notice under Section 80 of the civil Procedure Code by Registered Post upon the defendants-respondents. (xi) On receipt of the said notice, some amount towards part payment was paid to the plaintiff by the Coal Superintendent. The original plaintiff went on looking after the claim cases at the requests of the coal Superintendent, who assured to make all the efforts to clear his bills. However, the plaintiff's bills were not finally cleared and a sum of Rs. 1,50,329. 19 accumulated. The original plaintiff, thus, filed the suit. ;