In an intriguing legal examination, the Kerala High Court is set to determine whether only Senior Advocates can appear without a vakalat or if any advocate can do so after filing a memo of appearance or making a declaration.
Traditionally, litigants appoint lawyers through a vakalat, authorizing them to appear in court. Typically, only lawyers holding the vakalat or Senior Advocates instructed by them can argue cases. However, the court now questions whether any advocate, not just designated Senior Advocates, can plead without this authorization.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice S Manu will interpret Rule 2 of the Kerala High Court Rules under Section 34(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961. This rule generally requires an advocate to file an appointment in writing, signed by the client, to act or plead in court. However, it allows other advocates to file a memorandum of appearance or declare they are acting on instructions from the appointed advocate for pleading purposes.
The court seeks to clarify whether “pleading” encompasses all aspects of conducting a case and making submissions. The ambiguity arose during a case involving advocate Aysha Abraham, who instructed Yeshwanth Shenoy, President of the Kerala High Court Advocates’ Association, to appear on her behalf. Shenoy, not a Senior Advocate, challenged the requirement to hold a vakalat, citing Rule 2’s allowance for memorandum of appearance.
Senior Advocate S Sreekumar and other lawyers have been invited to assist the court in resolving this issue. The matter is set for hearing on July 10, as the court aims to clarify the extent to which an advocate can plead without filing a vakalat.
