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

2011 Supreme(SC) 912

ANIL R.DAVE, MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Jaipur Vikas Pradhikaran – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar Choudhary – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. —

1. The present appeal, under section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) is filed against the final judgment dated 24.03.2002 of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India [hereinafter referred to as Disciplinary Committee] in BCI Transfer Case No. 74 of 1995, whereby the Committee dismissed the complaint of the appellant herein holding that no case of any misconduct is made out.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the present case are that the present complaint was filed under section 35 of the Act by Jaipur Development Authority against the present respondents before the State Bar Council of Rajasthan in the year 1994 which was entrusted to the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council of Rajasthan. Since the proceedings could not be completed in the stipulated period of one year, the complaint was transferred to the Bar Council of India in the year 1995, registered as Transfer Case No. 74 of 1995.

3. The allegations made in the complaint was that appellant engaged the Respondent No.1 herein on retainer basis in order to defend its cases pending in the different Courts at Jaipur, Rajasthan.




























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