Lawyer - Judgment Search Results
Lawyer Vs. Department of Justice
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-19-1997
Lawyer v. Department of Justice - 521 U.S. 567 (1997) OCTOBER TERM, 1996 Syllabus LAWYER v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Advocate Cuddalore; Collector of South Arcot Vs. an Advocate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-28-1958
Reported in: 1958CriLJ1321
Ramachandra Iyer J.1. The respondent is an advocate practising at Cuddalore, South Arcot District. He was appointed to the office of the Public Prosecutor for a
Advocate General of Madras Vs. Amanullakhan, Advocate, Salem 1
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Mad162; 1967CriLJ551
Court - Article 215 of Constitution of India and Section 3 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 - lawyer exchanged some heat with presiding officer of Court - lawyer did not intend to insult Court - lawyer
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Advocate-general of Madras Vs. Sri Amanullakhan, Advocate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-1966
Reported in: (1966)2MLJ219
is Sri Amanullakhan, a member of the Salem Bar, and the proceedings have been initiated by the learned Advocate-General under Section 3 of the. Contempt of Courts Act, XXXII of 1952 and Article 215 of the Constitution
Ashok Pandey, Advocate Vs. Satish Chandra Mishra (Presently, Advocate ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1294
The present writ petition styled as Public Interest Litigation (for short P.I.L.) has been filed by a practicing lawyer of this Court, who by now is fairly known in the legal fraternity, at least at Lucknow because
Re:mohit Chaudhary, Advocate Vs. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Aug-17-2017
a special bench, deviating from the regular bench, in violation of judicial propriety and decorum?. - Could any lawyer/party or any of the Hon’ble Judge made a request, without notice to other parties, for putting the matter
J.R. Parashar, Advocate and ors. Vs. Prasant Bhushan, Advocate and ors ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: AIR2001SC3395; 2001(49)BLJR2222; 2001CriLJ4207; 2001(4)Crimes217(SC); JT2001(7)SC189; 2001(5)SCALE524; (2001)6SCC735; 2002(1)LC62(SC)
are given. Yet each of the five persons named as petitioners has given the Bar Library or the Lawyers Chamber as his address. The non-compliance with Rule 4(a) is more shocking when it comes to the Respondents.
State of A.P. Rep. by the Advocate General, High Court of A.P. Vs. S. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALT461
as a party-in-person and appeared as counsel in W.P. No. 7467/99 filed by one B. Srinivasa Rao, an advocate. Both these writ petitions were directed against the recommendations made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, of Members of
M.S. Rahi, Advocate Vs. Bhoop Singh, Advocate
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Feb-17-2005
Reported in: (2005)140PLR122
and the same has been affirmed in appeal.4. It has been found that the landlord is a practicing Advocate in Punjab and Haryana High Court and one of his sons is practicing Advocate though unmarried. It has
State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by the Advocate General Vs. V. Prakasa Ra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALD(Cri)702; 1997(5)ALT724
ORDERD. Reddeppa Reddi, J.1. The respondent-contemner (hereinafter referred to as the 'contemner') is an Advocate practising in the Courts of District Munsif and Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Mobile) at Mulug and other
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free