Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 23 views

    Case File

    Uploaded by

    Kavya Joanna
    1) A complaint was filed by B. Kumaraswamy against advocate Sita Ram Babu before the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh Disciplinary Committee. 2) On March 29, 2014 both parties and their advocates were present before the committee. 3) The parties filed a memo stating that the matter had been compromised and the complainant wanted to withdraw the case, which was signed by both advocates. Both parties also stated this openly to the committee. 4) Therefore, the committee recorded the memo and dismissed the complaint as withdrawn, with each party bearing their own costs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case File

    Uploaded by

    Kavya Joanna
    23 views2 pages
    1) A complaint was filed by B. Kumaraswamy against advocate Sita Ram Babu before the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh Disciplinary Committee. 2) On March 29, 2014 both parties and their advocates were present before the committee. 3) The parties filed a memo stating that the matter had been compromised and the complainant wanted to withdraw the case, which was signed by both advocates. Both parties also stated this openly to the committee. 4) Therefore, the committee recorded the memo and dismissed the complaint as withdrawn, with each party bearing their own costs.

    Original Title

    case file

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) A complaint was filed by B. Kumaraswamy against advocate Sita Ram Babu before the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh Disciplinary Committee. 2) On March 29, 2014 both parties and their advocates were present before the committee. 3) The parties filed a memo stating that the matter had been compromised and the complainant wanted to withdraw the case, which was signed by both advocates. Both parties also stated this openly to the committee. 4) Therefore, the committee recorded the memo and dismissed the complaint as withdrawn, with each party bearing their own costs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    23 views2 pages

    Case File

    Uploaded by

    Kavya Joanna
    1) A complaint was filed by B. Kumaraswamy against advocate Sita Ram Babu before the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh Disciplinary Committee. 2) On March 29, 2014 both parties and their advocates were present before the committee. 3) The parties filed a memo stating that the matter had been compromised and the complainant wanted to withdraw the case, which was signed by both advocates. Both parties also stated this openly to the committee. 4) Therefore, the committee recorded the memo and dismissed the complaint as withdrawn, with each party bearing their own costs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    BEFORE THE BAR COUNCIL OF THE STATE OFANDHRA PRADESH : :

    HYDERABAD.

    DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE NO.VIII

    Dated this the Twenty Ninth day of March, 2014


    - - -

    Present: Shri K. Srinivasa Rao, Chairman


    Shri B. Gokula Krishna, Member
    Shri V.Srinivasa Reddy, Member
    * * *
    COMPLAINT CASE NO. 6 of 2014
    Between:

    SRI B.KUMARA SWAMY,


    S/o late B.Anjaiah, Occ:Retd.
    Govt. Employee, H.No.8-3-228/69, Rahmathagar,
    Beside :Gurudwara, Yousufguda,
    HYDERABAD -500 045. .. Complainant

    Vs.

    Sri SITA RAM BABU, S


    Advocate,
    HIG 111, Barath Nagar Colony, .. Respondent
    Near community Hall, Moosapet, Hyderabad.

    The case referred to the Disciplinary Committee No.IV by the Bar Council of A.P.
    under section 35(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961 (Act No.25/1961).

    This case is coming on for consideration before the Disciplinary Committee


    No.VIII and after giving notice to the Advocate - General under Section 35(2) of
    Advocates’ Act, 1961 and after perusing the entire record, the Committee made the
    following:-

    O R D E R

    Today i.e. on 29-03-2014, both parties are present. Sri Nagarju Goud,

    Advocate filed vakalat for the complainant. Sri M.Ganneswara Rao, Advocate filed

    vakalat for the respondent. Memo filed by both the parties that the matter has been

    compromised and the complainant may be permitted to withdraw the case. The said

    Memo is signed by the Advocates for both the parties. Both the parties in the open

    Court also stated that the petition may be permitted to withdraw the complaint,

    therefore, the Memo has been recorded and the complaint is dismissed as not

    pressed. Each party shall bear their own costs.

    Sd/- K. Srinivasa Rao, Chairman


    Sd/- B. Gokula Krishna, Member
    Sd/- V.Srinivasa Reddy, Member
    Appendix of Evidence

    ORAL

    For the Complainant : - None -

    For the Respondent : - None –

    Documentary

    For the complainant : - Nil -

    For the Respondent : - Nil -

    (BY ORDER )

    (N.Renuka )
    Secretary, Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh &
    Registrar, Disciplinary Committee No. VIII

    - - -

    You might also like