Friday, March 6, 2026

Latest:

Bombay HC – Section 11 of MOFA – Deemed Conveyance – Objections of Promoter that Project was not complete and balance FSI is available for future development.
Bombay HC Clarifies Membership Law – Unregistered Transfers Cannot Confer Housing Society Rights and Ownership
Bombay HC – Termination Disputes Outside Section 91 of the Maharashtra Coop Societies Act – Reaffirms Supreme Court Precedent
Bombay HC – Nominee’s Membership in Housing Society Valid – Succession Disputes of Legal Heirs Must Go to the Civil Court
Bombay HC Protects Right to File Revision under Sectio 154(2A) of MC Societies Act – Pre-deposit requirement Applies Only to Hearing

2025 Latest Legal September 2025 Supreme Court

Justice for the Bar – SC shields Advocate from harassment

September 24, 2025 legaldeli

The respondent-advocate was not representing the complainant or his predecessors. The respondent Advocate simply identified the plaintiff being the authorized representation in the consent terms which is not disturbed to date.

However, the complainant had filed complaint for professional misconduct against the said respondent – advocate for the opposite party.

By the Order dated 6.7.2023 of the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, the complaint against the Respondent – Advocate was referred to its Disciplinary Committee for alleged professional misconduct under Section 35 of the Advocates Act.

However, this was stayed by the High Court by the interim order dated 4.11.2023 and same is challenged in the Supreme Court.

HELD that the Respondent Advocate had admittedly not represented the complainant and thus, the complaint filed against the advocate for the opposite party is nothing short of a gross abuse of process of law.

When the regulatory body like the Bar Council intends to proceed for professional misconduct against an enrolled Advocate, then it is essential that at least a bare minimum discussion of allegations set out in the complaint is made before referring the complaint to the Disciplinary Committee.

Thus, on mere identification of the plaintiff, the respondent – advocate cannot be held liable to face proceedings under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

There existed no professional relationship between the respondent – advocate and the complainant. His prosecution, as being law of the opposite in the suit before the High Court, was highly objectionable, totally impermissible and absolutely uncalled for. Ordinarily the existence of a jural relationship between the complainant and the advocate concerned is a precondition for the invocation of disciplinary jurisdiction on the ground of professional misconduct.

Judgment dated 24.9.2025 of the Supreme Court of India in SLP (Civil) No.27606 of 2023 of Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Vs. Rajiv Nareshchandra Narula and others with connected matters.

.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

I HAVE READ THE DISCLAIMER AND AGREE TO IT.

User Acknowledgement

By proceeding further and clicking on the "AGREE" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about LegalDeli for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from LegalDeli or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this knowledge site. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below.

Disclaimer
About: This knowledge-site (www.LegalDeli.in) is owned and operated by LegalDeli (“NDA”), and is a resource for your informational and educational purposes only.

No Warranty: NDA does not warrant that any content or information contained on this knowledge-site is accurate, correct, complete or up-to-date, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any actual or threatened loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or otherwise. NDA assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the content and/or information contained on this knowledge-site, nor does it offer any warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied in relation to such content or information.

Third-Party Links: NDA does not intend that links / URLs contained on this knowledge-site re-directing users to third party websites be considered as referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with any such third party website operators. NDA is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the content or information contained on such third party websites to which links may be provided on this knowledge-site.

No Legal Advice: By clicking ‘I agree’ and proceeding further, you acknowledge, represent and undertake that you on your own accord wish to know more about NDA, its capabilities and research content and information contained on the knowledge-site, for your own knowledge and personal use. The content and information contained on this knowledge-site should not be construed as nor relied upon as legal advice. You as a reader or recipient of content or information contained in this knowledge-site should not act, nor refrain from acting, based upon any or all of such content or information, but should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel licensed to practice the relevant law in the appropriate jurisdiction.

No Attorney-Client Relationship: This knowledge-site is not intended to be and you should not consider the content or information contained therein to be an advertisement, solicitation, inducement or invitation for an Attorney-Client relationship. Transmission, receipt or use of this knowledge-site, including content and information contained therein, does not constitute nor create an Attorney-Client relationship between NDA and you.