Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.32 seconds)
Krishna Builders And Developers And ... vs Shriram Housing Finance Limited And ... on 13 March, 2019
cites
Section 17 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 10 in The Public Premises (Eviction Of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Himalayan Co-Operative Group Housing ... vs Balwan Singh . on 29 April, 2015
44. By placing reliance on the judgment reported at (2015) 7 SCC 373 [Himalayan Coop. Group
Housing Society vs. Balwan Singh and others], it is argued that the lawyer's authority to
make concession/admission/statement/compromise/settlement on behalf of his client
before the court was not binding on the client. Although lawyers are perceived to be
agents of their clients, the law of agency does not apply strictly to client and lawyer
relationship, since the lawyers also stand in a fiduciary relationship to their clients, their
duties are more demanding than those of other agents and lawyers are required to
respect the client's autonomy to make decision in his matter. Though lawyers, it was
held, could decide about tactics/means to be adopted while dealing with the cases
without consulting with their clients, appropriate instructions from the client or his
authorized agents should be sought before making any
18
concession/statement/admission/settlement/compromise before the court which may,
directly or remotely, affect the rightful legal right of the client.