AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
There is no doubt the language used in the petition was highly improper, and in returning the petition for amendment, the Judge adopted the
proper course. As no further immediate action was taken and the petition was not represented, the matter should have been allowed to drop and
not resuscitated after the lapse of several months.
Further, we are of opinion that steps should not have been taken against the petitioner under the Legal Practitioners Act go long as it was
possible to take notice of the act in any other way, as one committed by a suitor. [See the case of In re Wallace L.R. 1 P.C. 283. It may be added
that the act of the petitioner was not per se sufficient to disqualify him from continuing to be a pleader.
We therefore dismiss the charge.