During proceedings in a civil case High Court of Delhi , the Judge passed an EX-party order as both the defendant and his councilor did not turn up on 15th July 2009. An application was made by the defendant’s councilor to reopen the case. The reason stated was that the during the proceedings earlier to the ex-party order date he had noted the hearing date wrongly as 15th Oct 2009 and that non-appearance may be condoned and the ex-party order set aside. But the applicant by revoking RTI Act extracted a report from the Registrar of the Court that the defendant councilor did make a request for issuance of a gate pass to his client for 15th July 2009. The applicant filed this report and opposed any re-opening. The Judge wasted no time to dismiss. Also he 1).slammed Rs25,000 fine on the councilor for filing a false statement, 2.) asked registrar to make a case of filing false statement by the councilor and the defendant in court under sec 195 crpc 3) asked registrar to make a letter to bar council to consider cancellation of license given to the defendant’s councilor.

In my case that is going on from 2004 the defendant had taken three councilors. The defendant had on advice of the second councilor filed a written argument just opposite of an averment made by him on the counseling of the first and an acceptance of the contrary statement on the advice of a third advocate. Is only defendant can be taken to task in this case or the second councilor as well? Instead of Judge can I as an individual approach the Bar Council and place the records before it against second advocate’s behavior? The second advocate ought to have seen the averments made by his proceeding councilor before filing a statement.