https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378441 A person whose enrolment as an advocate was earlier cancelled for suppression of material facts and misrepresentation cannot a fresh right to enrolment through repeated applications once that cancellation has attained finality. The Supreme Court noted that a subsequent acquittal in the criminal case did not erase the original defect in the enrolment process, and Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961 recognises the power to remove a name entered by misrepresentation. The repeated enrolment attempts were therefore treated as an abuse of process, and the refusal to enrol was upheld. en-us Fri, 01 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:25:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378441 A person whose enrolment as an advocate was earlier cancelled for suppression of material facts and misrepresentation cannot a fresh right to enrolment through repeated applications once that cancellation has attained finality. The Supreme Court noted that a subsequent acquittal in the criminal case did not erase the original defect in the enrolment process, and Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961 recognises the power to remove a name entered by misrepresentation. The repeated enrolment attempts were therefore treated as an abuse of process, and the refusal to enrol was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 01 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378441