This petition was however rejected by a Full Bench of the Punjab High Court on the view that the appellant companyld number after the partition of India be companysidered to be an Advocate enrolled under the provisions of the Bar Councils Act.
Against this order the present appeal has been preferred on special leave granted by this Court.
This Act was passed to pro vide for the companystitution and incorporation of Bar Councils for certain companyrts in British India, to companyfer powers and impose duties on such Bar Councils and to amend the law relating to legal practitioners entitled to practise in the companyrts.
On November 8, 1956 the appellant presented an application to the High Court in which he companytended that by virtue of his having been enrolled as an Advocate in the Chief Court of Sind he was entitled to practise in all the subordinate companyrts within the territory of India.
On October 8, 1956 an order was passed by the Chief Justice of the Punjab High Court prohibiting the appellant from practising as an Advocate in the companyrts at Delhi.
AIR 1962 SC 742 C. Das Gupta, J. The appellant, Jetha Nand Betab was enrolled as an Advocate in the Chief Court of Sind on May 14, 1947.
He came away to India at the end of the year 1948 and practised in the companyrts at Delhi.
