IN RE: ADVOCATE ON RECORD INCLUDES A PROPRIETARY FIRM ETC. versus .

IN RE: ADVOCATE ON RECORD INCLUDES A PROPRIETARY FIRM ETC. versus .

The Court held that, while any broader permission to register and operate under various sole proprietorship styles would require amendment of the Supreme Court Rules and is a matter for the rule-making authorities, on the individual facts the petitioner may use the specific style "Law Chambers of Siddharth Murarka, Sole Proprietor Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India AOR NO.2151, M: 9324175774/1" on his letterhead and in Vakalatnamas, and any such Vakalatnamas will be treated as Vakalatnama of Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate-on-Record.

Parties
Petitioner: Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka; Applicant in Person: Abhigya Kushwah
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) No.1107/2020 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Judgment
Outcome
Allowed in part; specific relief granted and proceedings closed
Legal Topics
Advocate on Record Registration, Vakalatnama, Use of Firm/style Name on Letterhead, Supreme Court Rules, 2013
Legal Profession Court Procedure Professional Regulation Rulemaking Advocate on Record Registration Vakalatnama Use of Firm/style Name on Letterhead Supreme Court Rules, 2013

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka

Petitioner

Abhigya Kushwah

Applicant in Person

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) No.1107/2020 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an Advocate-on-Record can have entry in the Advocate-on-Record register in the form of his style of carrying on profession e.g. 'Law Chambers of Siddharth Murarka' instead of his personal name
  2. 2 Whether a sole proprietorship style may be used on letterhead and Vakalatnama without amendment of the Supreme Court Rules
  3. 3 Whether Vakalatnamas filed in such style will be treated as Vakalatnama of the registered Advocate-on-Record

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that, while any broader permission to register and operate under various sole proprietorship styles would require amendment of the Supreme Court Rules and is a matter for the rule-making authorities, on the individual facts the petitioner may use the specific style "Law Chambers of Siddharth Murarka, Sole Proprietor Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India AOR NO.2151, M: 9324175774/1" on his letterhead and in Vakalatnamas, and any such Vakalatnamas will be treated as Vakalatnama of Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate-on-Record.

Court Disposition

Allowed in part; specific relief granted and proceedings closed

Orders

  • Permitted to use the style 'Law Chambers of Siddharth Murarka, Sole Proprietor Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India AOR NO.2151, M: 9324175774/1' on letterhead and in Vakalatnamas.
  • Any Vakalatnama filed in that style shall be treated as the Vakalatnama of Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Advocate-on-Record.