Bharat Bar Association (Advocates & Solicitors)

  Published by barassociation on January 24, 2024 January 24, 2024 In a landmark development, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has recently issued a notice in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocates Vivek Tiwari and Abhishek Malhotra. The PIL seeks standardized stipend and remuneration guidelines from the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh. This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of financial disparities faced by young advocates and law interns, prompting a closer examination of the fundamental rights and professional standards in the legal profession. In this overview, we delve into the court’s directive, key requests in the PIL, legal arguments presented, the lack of formal regulations, and the court’s decision, all shaping a narrative advocating for fair Minimum Remuneration Guidelines in the legal realm. Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice to BCI Regarding Plea for Minim...

  Posted on March 27, 2020 by barassociation Poonamallee Criminal Bar Association 2018 Poonamallee Criminal Bar Association registered under Bar Council of India. No: 40/91. The election was conducted and the office bearers were elected unanimously. Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry

  In a resounding triumph, Advocate G Mohanakrishnan has secured his third consecutive term as the president of the Madras High Court Advocates Association (MHAA), underscoring his exceptional leadership within one of Asia’s largest lawyer bodies. The election, held on December 15, witnessed Mohanakrishnan garnering an impressive 1,301 votes, surpassing his closest rival, R. C. Paul Kanagaraj, and M. Velmurugan. This victory not only reflects Mohanakrishnan’s steadfast commitment to the legal profession but also positions him as an influential figure dedicated to shaping the future of legal advocacy in the region. Join us as we delve into the election details, Mohanakrishnan’s impactful journey, and the pledges he has made for his latest term, which promises to foster an inclusive legal environment and elevate legal standards within MHAA. Additionally, we’ll explore the newly elected officials who will collaborate with Mohanakrishnan to guide the association toward co...

  In a landmark development, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has recently issued a notice in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocates Vivek Tiwari and Abhishek Malhotra. The PIL seeks standardized stipend and remuneration guidelines from the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh. This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of financial disparities faced by young advocates and law interns, prompting a closer examination of the fundamental rights and professional standards in the legal profession. In this overview, we delve into the court’s directive, key requests in the PIL, legal arguments presented, the lack of formal regulations, and the court’s decision, all shaping a narrative advocating for fair Minimum Remuneration Guidelines in the legal realm. Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice to BCI Regarding Plea for Minimum Remuneration Guidelines for Young Advocates and Law Interns Over...

The Supreme Court of India has issued a strong reminder that those seeking legal recourse through writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution must act promptly. In a recent case, the court dismissed a petition due to “delay and laches,” meaning the petitioner waited an unreasonable amount of time to file the case. Moreover, This serves as a clear illustration of how Delay Can Cost You Your Case, emphasizing the critical importance of timely action in seeking judicial redress. “Supreme Court Emphasizes Timely Action in Article 226 Writ Petitions: Case Dismissed Due to Delay and Laches” The case involved a dispute over an LPG distributorship. The appellant (successful bidder) was awarded the distributorship in 2014. However, the unsuccessful bidder (respondent) only challenged this decision in 2017, after the appellant was offered alternate land to build a godown and showroom. The Supreme Court found that the respondent’s four-year delay in filing the writ petition ...