Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Citedby 25 docs - [View All]
Shree Parvati Metals E-6 Riico Ind ... vs Union Of India Thr Commissioner Of ... on 6 December, 2017
Commissioner vs In on 3 March, 2011
Linder Frank Wolfgang vs Yogesh D. Shah And Anr. on 1 November, 1999
Linder Frank Wolfgang vs Yogesh D.Shah & Anr on 11 September, 2001
Commissioner Of Customs, Govt vs Baji Rao Bombaywala on 17 August, 2011

Application to MA in Law, Politics and Society in Ambedkar University, Delhi is open till 24 June. Apply here

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Supreme Court of India
K.I. Pavunny vs The Asstt Collector, Cochin on 24 February, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1998 CriLJ 4018, JT 1998 (2) SC 533, 1998 (2) SCALE 354, (1998) 4 SCC 69, 1998 (1) UJ 716 SC
Bench: S S Ahmad, G Pattanaik, M J Rao


1. The applicant was a practising advocate at Allahabad mainly on the taxation side and was elevated as Judge of the Allahabad High Court. He retired in July, 1992 and has since been enrolled as Senior Advocate in this Court.

2. While deciding Criminal Appeal No. 543 of 1988 some remarks came to be made against his competence as counsel. These applications have been given by him that those remarks may be deleted as he was not given an opportunity to explain his conduct before those remarks were made. It is pointed out by him in his applications as under:

"That as already stated that since the brief of the applicant consisted only of a copy of the High Court judgment and no other papers were there and judgment was reserved and the remarks against the applicant were ultimately made in the judgment dated 3rd February, 1997. The applicant did not get any opportunity to place the handicapped while arguing the case."

3. Having heard the learned counsel who is appearing in person and having perused the judgment, we allow the applications. Remarks made against the applicant personally in the judgment delivered by this Court on February 3, 1997 shall be treated to have been deleted.