VIJAY DHANJI CHAUDHARY versus SUHAS JAYANT NATAWADKAR

VIJAY DHANJI CHAUDHARY versus SUHAS JAYANT NATAWADKAR

Advocates-on-Record must perform substantive roles and cannot simply lend their names for filing petitions, as this defeats the purpose of the system.

Parties
Petitioner: Vijay Dhanji Chaudhary; Respondent: Suhas Jayant Natawadkar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Interlocutory Application for Restoration, Adjourned
Outcome
Matter adjourned; notice issued to Advocates-on-Record Association and Supreme Court Bar Association.
Legal Topics
Role and Responsibility of Advocates on Record, Supreme Court Rules
Civil Procedure Role and Responsibility of Advocates on Record Supreme Court Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vijay Dhanji Chaudhary

Petitioner

Suhas Jayant Natawadkar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Interlocutory Application for Restoration, Adjourned

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Advocates-on-Record can act as mere name-lenders without fulfilling their responsibilities
  2. 2 Misuse of Advocates-on-Record system in filing petitions

Ratio Decidendi

Advocates-on-Record must perform substantive roles and cannot simply lend their names for filing petitions, as this defeats the purpose of the system.

Court Disposition

Matter adjourned; notice issued to Advocates-on-Record Association and Supreme Court Bar Association.

Orders

  • Notice directed to Advocates-on-Record Association and Supreme Court Bar Association to assist Court in finding solutions.
  • Registry directed to furnish copies of the order to said Associations.