 Home (http://www.pathlegal.in/) World (http://www.pathlegal.

com)
(http://www.pathlegal.in/)
Search (http://www.pathlegal.in/search.php) About Us (http://www.pathlegal.in/contact.php)

Login (http://www.pathlegal.in/my/login.php)

A LAWYER OUTSIDE STATE CANNOT APPEAR IN COURT WITHOUT A LOCAL LAWYERS APPOINTMENT-ALLAHABA

HC
F
r rickjohn Posted 21 May 2017 Post Comment Visitors: 8340 (/blogs.php?
e
e category=LawNews)

A 840

d
v
i
c
e
(http://www.pathlegal.in/freelegaladvice.php)

A Lawyer Outside State Cannot Appear In Court without A Local

Lawyers Appointment-Allahaba HC
As per the Rules, an Advocate who is not on the Roll of Advocate or the Bar Council of the State is not allowed to appear, act or plead in the said Court unless he files an

appointment along with the advocate who is on the Roll of such State Bar Council and is ordinarily practicing in that Court. The impact of this Rule is that for appearance

in Allahabad High Court, an Advocate who is registered with the Bar Council of the State of Uttar Pradesh is allowed to appear, act or plead in the said Court only when

he files his Vakalatnama along with an Advocate who is enrolled with Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and is ordinarily practicing in the Allahabad High Court. This Rule was

challenged mainly on the ground that these Rules put an unreasonable restriction on his right to practice as an Advocate and are also ultra vires the provisions of Section

30 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

Start your own law firm? PathLegal Branding

(http://www.pathlegal.in/branding_work/branding_client_dashboard.php)

The Bench held that Rules 3 and 3A of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 are perfectly valid, legal and do not violate the right of the appellant under Article 19(1) (g)

of the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court in JAMSHED ANSARI VS. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD & ORhas held that right of Advocates to appear and conduct cases in

the court is a matter on which the court must and does have major supervisory and controlling power and it cannot be and are not divested of control or supervision of

conduct in court merely because it may involve the right of an Advocate.

  Dismissing an appeal against Allahabad High Court Judgment preferred by a lawyer, Jamshed Ansari, the Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices AK Sikri and N V

Ramana held that Rules 3 and 3A of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and perfectly valid. legal and do not violate the right of the appellant under Article 19(1) (g) of
the Constitution of India

Click the image to read more about: IS SUB REGISTRAR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATION OF REGISTERED

DOCUMENT

F
r
e
e

A
d
v
i
c
e
(http://www.pathlegal.in/freelegaladvice.php)

(http://www.pathlegal.in/IS-SUB-REGISTRAR-HAS-THE-AUTHORITY-TO-CANCEL-THE-REGISTRATIO-legalnewscopied-1024981)

Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any. This report may be copied from a
news/channel/magazine/blog/site for knowledge sharing, where PathLegal DISCLAIM any ownership of the content posted and offer NO warranty about the data. In case

of any objection, please do write to pathlegal@gmail.com

840

very nice knowledge for all

8 Jun 2017

Strange logic. Is this rule also applicable on Doctors who visit to different states for medical purposes.

22 May 2017

Post Comment Post Comment