{"id":194076,"date":"2018-03-17T13:09:42","date_gmt":"2018-03-17T07:39:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=194076"},"modified":"2018-03-27T14:45:59","modified_gmt":"2018-03-27T09:15:59","slug":"2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/","title":{"rendered":"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5"},"content":{"rendered":"

Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections:<\/strong> Order for constitution of Committee by Bar Council of India (BCI) to oversee elections to State Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, not interfered with. Said Committee consisted of retired Chief Justices\/Judges of various High Courts. [Ajayinder Sangwan v. Bar Council of Delhi, (2018) 2 SCC 770<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections \u2014 Schedule for elections \u2014 Compliance with directions of Court:<\/strong> BCCI having finalized schedule for election in respective State Bar Councils (as on date of present order, that is, 5-2-2018), contempt petition against BCI, dismissed. [Ajayinder Sangwan v. K.K. Mohan, (2018) 2 SCC 774<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections \u2014 Directions: <\/strong>Elections directed to be held on basis of provisional electoral rolls pending verification of Law degrees. All advocates who submitted applications along with Law degrees for verification be enrolled and shown in electoral list. Of course degrees already verified and found false and fake would be excluded from electoral list. Clarified that said electoral list and result of election would be subject to final decision of Court. Universities directed to expeditiously verify said degrees. Appropriate action would be taken against false and fake degrees after verification. Order in Ajayinder Sangwan,<\/em> (2018) 2 SCC 780<\/a>, modified accordingly. [Ajayinder Sangwan v. Bar Council of Delhi, (2018) 2 SCC 776<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Advocates \u2014 Election to Bar Councils \u2014 Verification of members of Bar Council and\/or Bar Association:<\/strong> State Bar Council requested permission for conducting immediate elections as term had expired long back while BCI emphasised need of verification of candidates to eliminate fake lawyers to ensure that deserving practising advocates were elected. To do complete justice following directions issued: (i) BCI and State Bar Councils to grant time to advocates to cure defective applications and submit verified degrees within stipulated time whereafter State Bar Councils to publish final electoral rolls; (ii) BCI to declare election schedule in respective State Bar Councils thereafter. [Ajayinder Sangwan v. Bar Council of Delhi, (2018) 2 SCC 780<\/a>]<\/p>\n

CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 \u2014 S. 2(l), as effective from 1-3-2008 \u2014 Availing of CENVAT credit in respect of service tax paid on transportation of goods from factory to the place of purchaser \u2014 Impermissibility of:<\/strong> Post amendment, \u201cinput services\u201d include those services which are used by the manufacturer, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products \u201cup to the place of removal\u201d. Thus, it is only \u201cup to the place of removal\u201d that service is treated as input service. Therefore, the benefit which was admissible even beyond the place of removal now gets terminated at the place of removal and doors to the CENVAT credit of input tax paid gets closed at that place. [CCE v. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., (2018) 2 SCC 721<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Evidence Act, 1872 \u2014 Ss. 3 to 9, 65-A, 65-B and 62 \u2014 Electronic evidence \u2014 Standard of proof, authenticity and admissibility \u2014 Law summarized: <\/strong>Ss. 65-A and 65-B of the Evidence Act, 1872, cannot be held to be a complete code on the subject. Threshold admissibility of electronic evidence cannot be ruled out on any technicality if same is relevant. Its authenticity and procedure for its admissibility may depend on fact situation such as whether person producing such evidence is in a position to furnish certificate under S. 65-B(4). If party producing electronic evidence is not in possession of device from which electronic document was produced, then such party, held, cannot be required to produce certificate under S. 65-B(4) of the Evidence Act. Requirement of certificate under S. 65-B(4) being procedural, can be relaxed by court wherever interest of justice so justifies. Thus, requirement of certificate under S. 65-B(4) is not always mandatory. [Shafhi Mohammad v. State of H.P., (2018) 2 SCC 801<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (32 of 2004) \u2014 Ss. 2(36), 2(34) and 2(35) \u2014 Computation of taxable turnover \u2014 Deductions \u2014 Entitlement to:<\/strong> Giving benefit of discount at a point of time subsequent to original sale\/purchase, held, is a regular trade practice and therefore qualifies for deduction. All regular trade discounts are allowable as permissible deductions if proper proof is shown. Assessee must establish from accounts that the discount relates specifically to sales with reference to which it is allowed. Therefore, R. 3(2)(c) proviso has to be read down to make it workable so that object of providing deductions on account of trade discount is not defeated. Therefore, language of R. 3(2)(c) proviso cannot be construed to mean that discount would be inadmissible as a deduction unless tax invoice pertaining to the goods originally issued shows said discount. [Maya Appliances (P) Ltd. v. CCT, (2018) 2 SCC 756<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 (21 of 1969) \u2014 Ss. 2(i), 69 and 70 (as amended by Amending Act 1 of 2000 w.e.f. 2-1-2003) r\/w S. 10, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: <\/strong>Jurisdiction of Labour Court under ID Act to decide service disputes between cooperative society\u2019s employee and employer, not barred by Ss. 69 and 70. KCS Act as well as ID Act both possess concurrent jurisdiction to decide any service dispute arising between cooperative society\u2019s employee and his\/her employer (cooperative society). Further held, it is choice of employee concerned to choose any one forum out of two forums available under two Acts to get service dispute decided which is however, subject to satisfying test laid down under ID Act that employee concerned is a \u201cworkman\u201d, dispute raised is \u201cindustrial dispute\u201d and cooperative society (employer) is \u201cindustry\u201d as defined under ID Act. [K.A. Annamma v. Cochin Coop. Hospital Society Ltd., (2018) 2 SCC 729<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (37 of 1966) \u2014 Ss. 49, 50, 126 and 127 \u2014 Areas reserved for acquisition \u2014 Delay in acquisition procedure \u2014 Right of dereservation \u2014 Procedure of dereservation: <\/strong>In this case, purchase notice under S. 49 had been given earlier and was confirmed by authorities but no purchase notice under S. 127 had been given after lapse of 10 yrs from date of publication of plan, hence, exercising jurisdiction under Art. 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, it was declared and held that reservation of appellant\u2019s land had lapsed. However, it was clarified that in all future cases, a second purchase notice must be served under S. 127 after lapse of 10 yrs (even if it has been served under S. 49 earlier) in order that lapsing can take place under S. 127. [Chhabildas v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 2 SCC 784<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 \u2014 Ss. 166 and 168 \u2014 Fatal accident \u2014 Compensation \u2014 Future prospects:<\/strong> In this case, 42 yrs old self-employed deceased was in business of cable networks. Tribunal awarded Rs 30,26,810 with interest at 9% p.a. factoring in a 30% towards loss of future prospects. The Supreme Court held that following principle laid down in judgment of Five-Judge Bench in Pranay Sethi<\/em>, (2017) 16 SCC 680, for deceased who was self-employed, future prospects cannot be denied and since deceased was 42 yrs of age, an addition of 25% on ground of future prospects would be warranted instead of 30% computed by Tribunal. Tribunal\u2019s calculation of annual income based on income tax returns for 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 being Rs 1,81,500, adding a component of 25% for future prospects to get Rs 2,26,875 and deducting one-fourth towards personal expenses, loss of dependency per annum works out to Rs 1,70,156. Applying multiplier of 14, total loss of dependency at Rs 23,82,187 then adding Rs 3,14,335 towards medical expenses. An addition of Rs 70,000 in terms of Pranay Sethi case <\/em>for conventional heads of loss of estate (Rs 15,000), loss of consortium (Rs 40,000) and funeral expenses (Rs 15,000). Total compensation quantified at Rs 27,66,522 with interest @ 9% p.a. from date of filing of claim petition. Apportionment directed to be carried out in terms of award of Tribunal. [Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shalu Sharma, (2018) 2 SCC 753<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 \u2014 Ss. 166, 168 and 173 \u2014 Compensation:<\/strong> Adding future prospects to established income of deceased while determining compensation, must be done in all cases as per ruling of five-Judge Bench in Pranay Sethi<\/em>, (2017) 16 SCC 680. [Munusamy v. T.N. STC (Villupuram) Ltd., (2018) 2 SCC 765<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Rent Control and Eviction \u2014 Revision \u2014 Jurisdiction as to \u2014 Nature and scope \u2014 Power to interfere with finding of fact:<\/strong> Appellant herein i.e. owner of shops in question filed eviction petitions relating to said shops against respondent tenants herein under Rent Act concerned on ground that those shops were in dilapidated condition and could not be repaired\/reconstructed without evicting tenants. Rent Controller, after going through reports and evidence of expert witnesses produced by both sides, dismissed said petitions opining that appellant was not able to prove that shops were in dilapidated condition. Said finding was affirmed by Appellate Authority. It was held by the Supreme Court that the view taken by courts below was a plausible view which could not be said to be perverse. Hence, High Court in exercise of its limited revisional jurisdiction rightly declined to interfere with such view of courts below. Contention of appellant that Appellate Authority and High Court failed to consider certain subsequent event alleged by him before those courts to fortify his case as to dilapidated condition of shops, held, not tenable as there was nothing on record to show that such contention was raised before said courts. [Surinder v. Nand Lal, (2018) 2 SCC 717<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections: Order for constitution of Committee by Bar <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":102451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[4751,26884,11411],"class_list":["post-194076","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-scc","tag-cases-reported","tag-supreme-court-cases"],"yoast_head":"\n2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections: Order for constitution of Committee by Bar\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-03-17T07:39:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-27T09:15:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/\",\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-03-17T07:39:42+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-27T09:15:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5","og_description":"Advocates \u2014 Bar Councils and Associations \u2014 State Bar Councils \u2014 Free and fair elections: Order for constitution of Committee by Bar","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-03-17T07:39:42+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-27T09:15:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/","name":"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","datePublished":"2018-03-17T07:39:42+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-27T09:15:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/03\/17\/2018-scc-vol-2-march-14-2018-part-5\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2018 SCC Vol. 2 March 14, 2018 Part 5"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":239125,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/13\/bci-extends-last-date-for-advocates-to-furnish-information-required-by-supreme-court-e-committee-to-31-12-2020-issues-clarifications-and-directions-for-strict-compliance\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":0},"title":"BCI extends last date for Advocates to furnish information required by Supreme Court e-Committee to 31-12-2020; Issues clarifications and directions for strict compliance","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 13, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"The General Council of the Bar Council of India at its meeting held on 7-11-2020 has again considered the requests received from various quarters including various Bar Associations and State Bar Councils to extend the last date for furnishing the information as per the format required by the e-Committee of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":234580,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/22\/bci-rules-for-no-confidence-against-office-bearers-of-bci-members-of-bci-and-officer-bearers-of-state-bar-councils-notified\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":1},"title":"BCI |Rules for \u201cNo Confidence\u201d against Office Bearers of BCI, Members of BCI and Officer Bearers of State Bar Councils — Notified","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 22, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Due to increased groupism in the Bar Councils, on many occasions Bar Council of India has been receiving complaints and a very anomalous situation arises some times. Because of some impractical rule of some states, the situation in some of the State Bar Council leads to unwanted groupism, resulting in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/bar-council-of-india.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":356241,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/11\/bci-state-bar-councils-cannot-collect-optional-fees-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":2},"title":"\u2018There is nothing like optional\u2019; BCI & State Bar Councils cannot collect any \u2018optional\u2019 fees: Supreme Court","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 11, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"A contempt petition was filed before the Court alleging that State Bar Councils are not complying with directions given in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, (2025) 1 SCC 641 with specific allegations for Karnataka State Bar Council.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bar councils cannot collect Optional Fees","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Bar-councils-cannot-collect-Optional-Fees.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Bar-councils-cannot-collect-Optional-Fees.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Bar-councils-cannot-collect-Optional-Fees.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Bar-councils-cannot-collect-Optional-Fees.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":289118,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/10\/supreme-court-to-examine-validity-of-exorbitant-enrolment-fees-charged-by-sbc-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":3},"title":"[Enrolment fees] Supreme Court issues notices to Union Government, Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court will be examining the validity of exorbitant enrolment fees charged by State Bar Councils","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Enrolment fees","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1068.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1068.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1068.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1068.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":365365,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/31\/supreme-court-bci-enrollment-fee-compliance-warns-contempt\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":4},"title":"Stick to enrollment fee limits or face contempt: SC directs BCI to issue written circulars to all State Bar Councils to ensure compliance with statutory limits","author":"Apoorva","date":"October 31, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWe make it clear that in future if it is brought to our notice that any of the State Bar Council is charging beyond the statutory fee prescribed, we shall proceed to hold the responsible authority guilty of contempt. This aspect should also be highlighted by the Bar Council of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court enrollment fee limit","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Supreme-Court-enrollment-fee-limit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Supreme-Court-enrollment-fee-limit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Supreme-Court-enrollment-fee-limit.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Supreme-Court-enrollment-fee-limit.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258978,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/24\/1273-complaints-from-state-bar-councils-transferred-to-bci-in-last-5-years-sc-unimpressed-by-covid-19-pandemic-excuse-for-non-disposal-of-complaints-issues-directions\/","url_meta":{"origin":194076,"position":5},"title":"1273 Complaints from State Bar Councils transferred to BCI in last 5 years: SC unimpressed by COVID-19 Pandemic excuse for non-disposal of complaints; Issues Directions\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 24, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has issued a series of directions after it was brought to its notice that in last five years, 1,273 complaints filed under Section 35 of the Advocates Act have been transferred to the Bar Council of India as the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/194076","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=194076"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/194076\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=194076"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=194076"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=194076"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}