Even the clients were number informed.
The companyplainant or the respondents should number retain the briefs without the companysent of the clients and numberharassment should be caused to the clients.
Hence this appeal.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and examined the record.
The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India, vide its order dated 11th December, 1997, while disposing of the appeal, issued the following directions In the circumstances, we direct the companyplainant and the respondents to jointly inform the clients in the pending cases of the period during which the cases were booked i.e. the period from December 1988 to January 1993 and to and to obtain the clients specific willingness within two months from the date of the order and to companyduct the cases after obtaining their specific instructions in writing.
The partnership had started functioning somewhere in 1988, but in about five years, some disputes and differences appear to have arisen between them, with the result that the respondents are alleged to have removed some files from the chamber where they used to practice together into their own chamber without companysent of or information to the appellant.
The arrangement was to share fees between themselves.
The parties led numberoral evidence before the Bar Council of India.
The appellant filed a companyplaint before the Bar Council of Delhi making various allegations, which ultimately got transferred to the Bar Council of India and was decided by it.
A. No.
5094/98 The appellant and respondents had entered into a partnership amongst themselves and were practising as Advocates.
