Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.76 seconds)Section 2 in Consumer Protection Act, 2019 [Entire Act]
The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956
The Advocates Act, 1961
State Of U.P vs U.P. State Law Officers Assn on 25 January, 1993
In State of UP v. UP State Law Officers Assn., , Sawant, J., speaking for the Supreme Court made the following pertinent remarks on the nature of legal profession and the relationship between a lawyer and his client :
Chengan Souri Nayakam vs A.N. Menon on 26 October, 1967
In the Full Bench decision of Nayakam v. Menon, AIR 1968 Ker. 213, Mathew, J., observed:
M. Veerappa vs Evelyn Sequeira & Ors on 13 January, 1988
Incidentally, we may mention that the" Supreme Court in M. Veerappa v. Evelyn Sequeira, , having referred to the provisions of Legal Practitioners (Fees) Act, 1926, held that the legal practitioners are liable to be sued for negligence in the performance of their duties. With respect, we must point out that the Supreme Court did not notice the fact that the Act of 1926
was repealed by the Advocates Act, 1961. Hence, that decision is not of any assistance.
Indian Medical Association vs V.P. Shantha & Ors on 13 November, 1995
3. Thus, we have a comprehensive definition of the term 'service' and its wide amplitude is denoted by the phrase "service of any description". After illustrating various services comprehended within the scope of 'service', the definition proceeds to exclude service rendered free of charge or under a contract of personal service. What is the nature and meaning of contract of personal service has been explained in Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha, and in Dr. A.S. Chandra v. Union of India, .