Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Madras High Court

K.Sathyabal vs Bar Council Of Tamil Nadu And on 27 June, 2016

Bench: M.M.Sundresh, K.Ravichandrabaabu

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:   27.06.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE  M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

 Rev. Apln. (W) Nos.58 to 61 of 2016
and
W.M.P.Nos.14523 to 14526 of 2016


K.Sathyabal				 	..	Applicant in
								Rev.A.No.58 of 2016

R.Y.George Williams			 	..	Applicant in
								Rev.A.No.59 of 2016

R.Prasadh					 	..	Applicant in
								Rev.A.No.60 of 2016

U.Rajarajan				 	..	Applicant in
								Rev.A.No.61 of 2016

Vs.

1.Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
	Puducherry by its Secretary,
   High Court Campus,
   Chennai - 104.

2.D.Selvam,
   Chairman,
   Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
	Puducherry, High Court Campus,
   Chennai - 104.

3.Bar Council of India
   by its Secretary,
   21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
   Near Bal Bhawan, 
   New Delhi - 110 002.

4.Mannan Kumar Misra,
   Chairman,
   Bar Council of India,
    21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
   Near Bal Bhawan, 
   New Delhi - 110 002.

5.Karnataka State Bar Council
   	Secretary,
   Old K.G.I.D. Building,
   Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi,
   Bangalore - 560 001.			..	Respondents in all
								the Review Applications
							


	Review Application preferred under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of C.P.C. against the order of this Court made in W.P.Nos.499, 500, 501  and 502 of 2016 dated 21.03.2016.

		For Applicant		: Ms.S.Meenakshi
						  in all the Review Applications

		For Respondents		: Ms.M.Srividhya for R1
						  in all the Review Applications
						  Mr.S.Y.Masood for R2
						  in all the Review Applications
						  Mr.S.R.Rajagopal for R3
 						   in all the Review Applications




COMMON ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) These Review Applications are filed by raising very many grounds on merits which, in effect, are nothing but an attempt to re-argue the matter on merits once again. Needless to say that such attempt is not the scope for the review jurisdiction.

2.Learned counsel appearing for the applicants sought the change of venue of enquiry from Bangalore to Chennai however by the same Karnataka State Bar Council.

3.In view of the detailed order passed in the writ petitions by this court on 21.03.2016 and in view of the order today passed by us extending the time for completion of the enquiry by six weeks and also by taking note of the fact that the enquiry is going on at Bangalore, we do not propose to entertain these review applications and also the request made by the applicants for change of the venue. Accordingly, these review applications stand closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

(M.M.S.J.)    (K.R.C.B.J.)
			                  		               27.06.2016
mmi

To
1.The Secretary,
   Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
	Puducherry,
   High Court Campus,
   Chennai - 104.

2.The Chairman,
   Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
	Puducherry, High Court Campus,
   Chennai - 104.

3.The Secretary, 
   Bar Council of India,

21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 002.

4.The Chairman, Bar Council of India, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 002.

5.Karnataka State Bar Council Secretary, Old K.G.I.D. Building, Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi, Bangalore - 560 001.

M.M.SUNDRESH, J and K.RAVICHANDRABAABU, J mmi Rev. Apln. (W) Nos.58 to 61 of 2016 27.06.2016