TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Advocate's Misconduct Leads to Court Warning and Costs</h1> <h3>Baijnath Prasad Gupta Versus Senior Regional Manager, F.C.I.</h3> The court found that the petitioner's advocate had misled the court, resulting in an erroneous order. The advocate admitted his mistake, apologized, and ... - Issues involved: Misleading the court, erroneous order, responsibility of advocates, loss incurred by Corporation, disciplinary actionMisleading the court:The petitioner's advocate had misled the court by falsely claiming that the petitioner had submitted the highest bid for all items, leading to an erroneous order. The court directed the respondent Corporation to file a counter-affidavit explaining why the contract was not awarded for all items to the petitioner. The advocate admitted his mistake, apologized, and promised responsible behavior in the future. The court considered it a case of gross misconduct and warned the advocate to conduct himself with dignity and responsibility in the future.Responsibility of advocates:The advocate representing the petitioner was held personally responsible for misleading the court, resulting in an erroneous order. The court condemned his conduct, considering it a case of gross misconduct. The advocate admitted his mistake, apologized, and promised to behave responsibly in the future. Despite the severity of the situation, the court accepted the unconditional apology and warned the advocate to be careful in the future.Loss incurred by Corporation:The court noted that the petitioner did not lift the materials for which he had been given the contract, resulting in a loss of Rs. 1,85,789 to the Corporation. The Corporation was left with only Rs. 25,000, the earnest money deposited by the petitioner. The advocate for the Corporation informed the court about the loss incurred due to the petitioner's failure to lift the materials, leading to a loss when the items had to be sold for a lesser amount after readvertising.Disciplinary action:The advocate for the Corporation suggested taking action against the petitioner's advocate under Sections 192, 196, and 209 of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, he proposed referring the matter to the Bar Council for appropriate action in accordance with the law. The court, however, accepted the advocate's unconditional apology and decided not to pursue the matter further against him. The writ petition was dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 10,000, and the advocate was warned to be careful in the future.---
TaxTMI 
