CHAPTER 4
RIGHT TO PRACTISE

29. Advocates to be the only recognized class of persons entitled to practice law

Subject to the provisions of this Act and any rules made thereunder, there shall, as from the appointed day, be only one class of persons entitled to practice the profession of law, namely, advocates.

COMMENTS

The advocates have been conferred rights to practice not only in all courts including the Supreme Court but also before any tribunal or person legally authorized to take evidence and also before any other authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled to practice. Therefore, the rights of an advocate to practice profession of law is a statutory right and not a fundamental right.-(1981) 2 Cal HN 56.

Right of the advocate to appear and conduct cases in the court is not an absolute right. It is subject to the rule framed by Supreme Court under Art. 145 of the Constitution of India or High Court under section 34. Court can thus frame rules debarring advocates guilty of contempt, unprofessional or unbecoming conduct from appearing before courts.-Ex Capt. Harish Uppal v. UOI, AIR 2003 SC 739.

30. Right of advocates to practice

Subject to the provisions of this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the l[State roll] shall be entitled'as of right to practice throughout the territories to which this Act extends,:


(i) in all courts including the Supreme Court;

(ii) before any tribunal or person legally authorized to take evidence; and

(iii) before any other authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled to practice.

COMMENTS

The rights of an advocate to practice profession of law clearly flows from the Advocates Act and therefore it is a statutory right and not a fundamental right.-(1981) 2 Gal HN 56.

Disciplinary jurisdiction over advocates though vested in Bar Council but final authority is with Supreme Court. If Bar Council fails to take disciplinary action Supreme Court can and will take action.-Ex Gapt. Harish Uppal v. UOI, AIR 2003 SG 739.

Notification prohibiting advocates from practicing deed writing and appearing before Regis¬trar. Writ petition was filed by members of Tripura Bar Association, an unregistered association. Member of Association did not belong to class of persons who due to poverty or some other disability were unable to approach court. They could certainly file writ petition in their personal capacity or representative capacity but failed to do so. They had, therefore, no locus standi to maintain writ petition- Tripura Bar Association, Agartala v. State of Tripura-AIR 2004 NaG 397 (Gauhati).

31. Special provision for attorney [Repealed by Act 107 of 1976, w.ef 1-1-19771

32. Power of court to permit appearances in particular cases.

Notwithstanding anything contained in this chapter, any court, authority or person may permit any person, not enrolled as an advocate under this Act, to appear before it or him in any particular case.

COMMENTS

A private person, who is not an advocate, has no right to argue for a party. He must get the prior permission of the court, for which the motion must come from the party itself. It is open to the court to grant or withhold or withdraw permission in its discretion.-AIR 1978 SG 1019.

33. Advocates alone entitled to practice

Except as otherwise provided in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, no person shall, on or after the appointed day, be entitled to practice in any court or before any authority or person unless he is enrolled as an advocate under this Act.

COMMENTS

A recognized representative cannot claim to appear as of right. Previous permission of court is necessary. There is no warrant whatsoever to place a recognized agent holding a general power-of-attorney to take proceedings in courts, in the same position, as an advocate to whom a vakalatnama has been given. To do so, would be to defeat the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1969.-1 Mad LJ 207.

The expression "practice" contemplates practicing as a profession for gain. That neither precludes a party in person in court to argue his own case or appoint an agent who is acceptable to the court to present his case other than a lawyer. Prohibition is to practice as a profession and not for mere appearance in an isolated case.-LR (1986) 2 Kant 2329 (2338).