<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1983 (11) TMI 343 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456687</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the civil revision petition, upholding the order that the advocate witness should not be summoned due to the privilege under Section 126 of the Evidence Act. The court emphasized that this privilege is crucial for maintaining client confidentiality and effective legal representation, except in cases involving illegal activities or fraud.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2024 16:47:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763460" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (11) TMI 343 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456687</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the civil revision petition, upholding the order that the advocate witness should not be summoned due to the privilege under Section 126 of the Evidence Act. The court emphasized that this privilege is crucial for maintaining client confidentiality and effective legal representation, except in cases involving illegal activities or fraud.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>