Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 190 (5.28 seconds)
Documents citing Bar Council Of Maharashtra vs M. V. Dabholkar Etc. Etc on 3 October, 1975

Arunava Ghosh And Others vs Bar Council Of West Bengal And Others on 26 September, 1995

106. Mr. Biswarajan Ghosal respondent No. 9 appearing in person has also tried to justify the impugned action of the Bar Council contending, inter alia, that the same was necessary for upholding the unity of the legal fraternity and referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar thereof where it has been held by the Supreme Court, inter alia, that the Bar Councils are to safeguard the rights, privileges and interests of Advocates. Reference has also been made to paragraph 28 of the said judgment where it has been held by the Supreme Court that the Bar Council Act is the centinel of professional code of conduct and is vitally interested in the rights and privileges of the Advocates as well as the purity and dignity of the profession while there cannot be any quarrel with such interpretation of the functions of the Bar Council made by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case, it is also to be remembered, as pointed out hereinbefore, that the Bar Council is not an association of Advocates, nor the same is a guild of lawyers nor the same is a trade union, but the same is a statutory body and its powers and functions are circumscribed by the provision of the statute and in the name of protecting interest of the Advocates, it cannot do something which actually affects the statutory and constitutional rights of the Advocates to practise as of right nor can it do anyting in the name of such protection of interest, which are unreasonable and will affect the administration of justice, block the access to the same and compel an Advocate to fail in his duty to the Court as an officer of the Court.
Calcutta High Court Cites 51 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Dhabji Meghji Maheshwari And 55 Ors. vs Hindustan Lever Limited And 3 Ors. on 29 October, 2007

About professional ethics and the skills to be developed for a successful career, I think I need not mention anything. Because professional ethics, I suppose is a subject expected to be learnt by the new advocates themselves, by you. As such I will conclude my words once again quoting V.R. Krishna Iyer, J. from Bar Council, Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar, case where the learned judge has delineated the moral standard expected from a practitioner of law. He is of the view that the professional conduct of advocates must be complete in tune with;
Gujarat High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - H K Rathod - Full Document

S.P. Gupta vs Union Of India & Anr on 30 December, 1981

It has, therefore, to be found out whether the Bar Council has a grievance in respect of an order or decision affecting the professional conduct and etiquette.The pre-eminent question is : what are the interests of the Bar Council ? The interests of the Bar Council are the maintenance of standards of professional conduct and etiquette. The Bar Council has no personal or pecuniary interest. The Bar Council has the statutory duty and interest to see that the rules laid down by the Bar Council of India in relation to professional conduct and etiquette are upheld and not violated. The Bar Council acts as the sentinel of professional code of conduct and is vitally interested in the rights and privileges of the advocates as well as the purity and dignity of the profession.
Supreme Court of India Cites 296 - Cited by 614 - Full Document

Saurav Chaudhary vs Union Of India & Anr. on 4 July, 2024

64. The Supreme Court in Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar and Others, (1976) 2 SCC 291 observed that soliciting, advertising, scrambling and other obnoxious practices, subtle or clumsy, for betterment of legal profession, will be considered as a taboo. In this case advocates tried to secure clients by means of solicitation, physical fight, undercutting of fees etc. Relevant observations of the Court are as under:
Delhi High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - P M Singh - Full Document

India Energy Exchange Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory ... on 13 February, 2026

corresponds to the requirement of locus standi. Where a right of appeal is provided against an administrative or a quasi-judicial decision by a statute, __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Judgment in Appeal No. 298 of 2025 Page 103 of 135 such a right is invariably conferred on a person aggrieved or a person who claims to be aggrieved. A person will be held to be aggrieved by a decision if that decision is materially adverse to him. Normally, one is required to establish that one has been denied or deprived of something to which one is legally entitled in order to make one "a person aggrieved". Again, a person is aggrieved if a legal burden is imposed on him. The meaning of the words "a person aggrieved" is sometimes given a restricted meaning in certain statutes which provide remedies for the protection of private legal rights. The restricted meaning requires denial or deprivation of legal rights. (Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar, (1975) 2 SCC 702 : 1975 SCC OnLine.SC 264; Noida Power Company Limited v. Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission and Anr. (Judgment of APTEL in Appeal No 98 if 2021 dated 28.11.2025). Generally speaking, a person can be said to be aggrieved by an order which is to his detriment, pecuniary or otherwise, or causes him some prejudice in some form or the other.
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity Cites 124 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Agricultural Produce Market Committee vs Pareshkumar Bhaskarrai Dave on 15 October, 2007

About professional ethics and the skills to be developed for a successful career, I think I need not mention anything. Because professional ethics, I suppose is a subject expected to be learnt by the new Advocates themselves, by you. As such I will conclude my words once again quoting V.R. Krishna Iyer, J. from Bar Council, Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar, case where the learned Judge has delineated the moral standard expected from a practitioner of law. He is of the view that the professional conduct of Advocates must be complete in tune with:
Gujarat High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - H K Rathod - Full Document

(Service Of All Notices On The vs Shri B.N. Vaish on 28 June, 2013

90. Therefore, under English Law, the category of persons aggrieved has been very widely interpreted, as far as the writ of certiorari is concerned, and perhaps the case law in Indian Jurisprudence also overall supports the same view point. Only in so far as the writ of mandamus is concerned, locus standi is not the rule under common law, and, as mentioned by Prof. Smith in his treatise, an application for a writ of mandamus may be made by any member of the public, and locus standi is not restricted, as in the case of applications for writs of certiorari. However, it may be noted here that in the case of Bar Council of Maharashtra vs. M.V. Dabholkar, 1975 (2) SCC 702 (720): AIR 1975 SC 2092: 1976 (1) SCR 306 as cited by Justice Krishna Iyer, Professor Wade had opined to the contrary as follows:-
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 143 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next