New Delhi (ILNS): In a first of its kind, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has secured the interest of local lawyers by making it mandatory for anyone filing a case to appoint a local lawyer. Under this, now in any case without the appointment of a local lawyer, it will not be possible to file a case. If any suit is filed, it will be dismissed as an incomplete category. To remove the imperfection, a local lawyer’s Vakalatnama must be invoked.
Manish Tiwari, Secretary and State Bar Member, High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur has informed that on the instructions of Chief Justice Sanjay Yadav (Acting), Registrar General Rajendra Kumar Wani has duly issued the order.
High Court Bar Association’s executive member Yash Soni had written a letter to the then Chief Justice as the bar representative and requested to appoint the local counsel in connection with the filing of cases in the high court.
The letter states that Section-3 of the high court rules, 2008 provides that if the parties appoint a lawyer from outside Jabalpur, Indore or Gwalior, they will also have to appoint a local counsel. In the Corona pandemic, advocates living outside the areas are filing cases through e-filing and arguing through video conferencing. This is in violation of section 3 of the high court rules. It was made mandatory to follow this rule.
Read Also: Bombay High Court allows 2 Jain temples to open for Dhanteras, Bhai Dooj
District bar president Sudhir Nayak and secretary Rajesh Tiwari have welcomed the decision of the high court. It has also been emphasized to take similar steps in respect of district courts. In the Corona era, the lawyers are facing financial crisis, so it is very important to implement such decision, he said.
sar- nap-tol is not correct, it’s not in public at large Interest, it’s one sided move with malafide intention with ulterior motives in favour of selected few influence locals, who will be held responsible if cases are lost will fully, mischievously, corruptly, coercively by unknown locals, such mindless single sided orders should be reviewed and revoked with immediate effect in public at large Interest
Sir,
It’s unfair decision taken as to how an outside applicant decide the capabilities of unknown, unheard of, untested,first timer authorised locals
1)-Applicants may be Exploited
2)-Applicants may be at the Mercy
3)-Already suffering Applicant will be Harassed
4)-It may give raise to Corruption
5)-It may give raise to Mischief
6)- It may give raise to Misleading
7)- It may give raise to Extortion
8)- It may give raise to Conspiracy
9)- Applicant may be put lots of Hardship for he may not get his choice to represent
10)-Applicants may be over burden with Exorbitant Costs which may be imposed
Good Decision. Every State should follow it strictly
The high court should have spent from its own pockets if it was so conserned .