SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(SC) 337

A.P.SEN, E.S.VENKATARAMIAH, R.B.MISRA
Pandurang Dattatraya Khandekar – Appellant
Versus
Bar Council Of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
S.V.TAMBWEKAR, V.D.KHANNA, V.J.Francis, V.N.GANPULE

JUDGMENT

SEN, J.— The disciplinary proceedings out of which this appeal under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (Act for short) has arisen were initiated on a complaint made by a group of 12 advocates practising in the two courts of Sub-Divisional Magistrates in the Collectorate of Poona alleging various acts of professional misconduct against the appellant P. D. Khandekar and one A. N. Agavane. The proceedings stood transferred to the Bar Council of India under Section 36B of the Act. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India by its order dated April 23, 1976 held both the appellant and A. N. Agavane guilty of professional midsconduct and directed that the appellant be suspended for a period of four months from June 1, 1976 and Agavane for a period of two months therefrom. This Court by its order dated September 24, 1976 admitted the appeal and stayed the operation of the suspension of order.

2. First as to the facts. The complainants alleged various acts of professional misconduct against the appellant and Agavane. According to them, the appellant and Agavane sometimes impersonated as other advocates for whom the briefs were meant and at times they directly approa

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top