https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308380 Communications made by a client to his pleader during the course and for the purpose of employment are protected by legal professional privilege under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act and cannot be disclosed without consent. A pleader's evidence repeating the client's statement that he was a benamdar was therefore inadmissible and ought not to have been received. Because the appellate court appears to have been materially influenced by that privileged evidence, the appellate judgment and decree were set aside and the matter was directed to be reheard after excluding the protected statements. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 1912 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Jun 2023 18:08:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308380 Communications made by a client to his pleader during the course and for the purpose of employment are protected by legal professional privilege under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act and cannot be disclosed without consent. A pleader's evidence repeating the client's statement that he was a benamdar was therefore inadmissible and ought not to have been received. Because the appellate court appears to have been materially influenced by that privileged evidence, the appellate judgment and decree were set aside and the matter was directed to be reheard after excluding the protected statements. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 10 Apr 1912 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308380