Govinda Bhagoji Kamable And Ors. vs Sadu Bapu Kamable (D/H. Maruti Sadashiv ... on 2 August, 2004
"9. Time and again I have noticed that some of
the Civil Courts and the District Courts proceed on the
assumption that once an Advocate files "no instruction
pursis" he is automatically discharged as an Advocate
representing his client. The said practice of the Courts
taking cognizance of a no instruction pursis which is
filed without following the procedure laid down by the
rules framed by this Court is to be deprecated. An
Advocate cannot simply walk out of a proceeding only
by filing such no instruction pursis. He owes a duty to
17 WP 4227 of 2021.odt
8
his client to appear for him in the proceedings till his
appointment is terminated by an order of the Court. In
view of the express provisions of the said Code and the
Rules framed by this Court, the vakalatnama of the
Advocate continues until leave is granted by the Court
concerned in favour of the Advocate to withdraw his
vakalatnama."