Search Results For: Other Laws


COURT:
CORAM: , ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: April 29, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: September 4, 2015 (Date of publication)
AY: -
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
The client is not bound by a statement or admission which he or his lawyer was not authorised to make. The Lawyer generally has no implied or apparent authority to make an admission or statement which would directly surrender or conclude the substantial legal rights of the client unless such an admission or statement is clearly a proper step in accomplishing the purpose for which the lawyer was employed

Generally, admissions of fact made by a counsel is binding upon their principals as long as they are unequivocal; where, however, doubt exists as to a purported admission, the Court should be wary to accept such admissions until and unless the counsel or the advocate is authorised by his principal to make such admissions. Furthermore, a client is not bound by a statement or admission which he or his lawyer was not authorised to make. Lawyer generally has no implied or apparent authority to make an admission or statement which would directly surrender or conclude the substantial legal rights of the client unless such an admission or statement is clearly a proper step in accomplishing the purpose for which the lawyer was employed. We hasten to add neither the client nor the Court is bound by the lawyer’s statements or admissions as to matters of law or legal conclusions. Thus, according to generally accepted notions of professional responsibility, lawyers should follow the client’s instructions rather than substitute their judgment for that of the client.

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL: ,
DATE: June 11, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: June 15, 2015 (Date of publication)
AY: -
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
RTI Act: Disclosure of income-tax returns of a politician on the ground that it is necessary for “purity of elections” and “probity in public life” is not possible as it is not in “public interest”

The details disclosed by a person in his Income Tax Returns is personal information which has been exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the said Act, unless involved a larger public and the CPIO and or State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information

COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: September 23, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 8, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
As the UOI has continued the process of appointment of Tribunal Members without amending the Rules, the Petitioner, who was wait-listed in 2007, deserves to be considered for appointment within 30 days

The Selection Committee finalized a list of 18 persons, 13 for the post of Accountant Member and 5 for the post of Judicial Member. The Petitioner, Inturi Rama Rao, was placed in a ‘Waiting List’ appointment as Accountant Member. The …

Inturi Rama Rao vs. UOI (Supreme Court) Read More »

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: September 9, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 6, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
An Attitudal change in Judges is required. It is high time for us to change our mind set and see whether this new technology can help us to increase the speed and also we have to take into account the convenience of the parties

In the said judgment, the Supreme Court has reproduced valuable observations of Justice Bhagwati in the case of National Textile Workers’ Union vs. P.R. Ramakrishnan at page 256 as follows: “We cannot allow the dead hand of the past to …

Suvarna Rahul Musale vs. Rahul Prabhakar Musale (Bombay High Court) Read More »