Home Maxims & Terms Counsel meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Counsel

Counsel legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2015 SCMR 976 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Professional duty of an advocate was that he was supposed to appear in court when a case was called.

1994 PLD 26 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent
Counsel's conduct

Inconstant stand on the factual aspects of case by counsel who incidentally had been appearing throughout the proceedings had not been appreciated

Count on the interpretation of legal proposition was no doubt allowed to take different stand, yet as far as indifferent plea on the factual aspect of/a civil case was concerned such plea could not be allowed to be agitated -Such conduct on the part of a counsel would amount to mis-represent in the factual side of the case with the object to mislead the Court from drawing a. correct decision, which would also tantamount to interfering deliberately in the safe administration of justice, thus, warranting a warning to counsel to be very careful in future while pleading cases.-[Administration of justice].

1989 MLD 885 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
CounselBail application

Counsel at the outset of argument stated that he had not yet been enrolled is an Advocate in the High Court and might be granted permission in the-matter

such permission was granted subject to all just exceptions.

1987 PLD 415 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Improper conduct of counsel is open to serious exception from both the moral and professional points of viewCounsel in such a case was required by High Court to return the fee alongwith the expenses paid to him by the client

Cases of such counsel were also desired to be taken up by the Bar Council.

1978 PLD 523 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Duty towards Court-Cannot be performed by counsel aligning himself with his client.-[Advocate]

1978 PLD 1436 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Duty of counsel towards his client and Court-Female client of tender age alleged or suspected to be victim of crime of violence or deceit and made to file proceedings to help very person who might have committed crime qua her-Minute and extraordinary care, held, would be needed by counsel in dealing with such client and counsel should not willingly and consciously allow his client to abuse process of Court and law.

1975 SCMR 199 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
PrivilegeMembership of Senate

A personal privilege-Cannot be extended to professional work-Contention that counsel attending Senate as its member is entitled to any privilege-Held: Entirely misconceived.

1974 PLD 44 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Decorum in Court- Counsel not to lose balance nor heart while meeting comments by Court during an argument or when hearing judgment announced-Court's comments meant only to elicit better answers so as to reach realities.

1973 PLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

-Counsel-Rights and duties of. A bold and a courageous Bar is doubtless an asset, but it is well established that no lawyer should align himself wholly and completely with the contemner and become oblivious of his obligations towards the Court of which he is an officer.

1954 PLD 325 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Counsel Counsel-Admission of, on question of factum of marriage of his client-Does not necessarily imply admission of validity of marriage-Power of Courts to relieve parties of effects of concession by their counsel.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Counsel", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2482

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Counsel"

MLD 1999
N/A

1999 M L D 1758

SHER MUHAMMAD — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Lahore
MLD 1997
N/A

1997 M LD 1576

MUHAMMAD and 3 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLD 1992
Writ Petition No.5018 of 1988, decided on 18th June, 1989.

P L D 1992 Lahore 432

MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL K14ARIAN and others‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑‑ 0. 111, R. 1 & OXXIIJ, R.3 ‑‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 ‑‑ Counsel's authority to enter into compromise on behalf of his client ‑‑ Validity ‑‑‑ Perusal of "Vakalatnama" given by petitioner to his counsel showed that counsel was specifically authorised to make any statement so as to have matter in question decided through arbitration, compromise on oath and also to file concessional written statement ‑‑‑ Counsel's statement that his petition be decided by specific mode was within scope of his authority conferred on him by "Vakalatnama"‑‑‑Petitioner thus, could not contend that he was not bound by the statement of his counsel especially when he did not object to the mode of deciding his cause and in fact participated therein ‑‑‑ Decision of Authority on basis of mode suggested by petitioner's counsel and acquiesced in by petitioner would not warrant interference in discretionary Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court.‑‑‑Counsel and client.
MLD 2003
2003-April-28

2003 M L D 1836

ALTAF-UR-REHMAN — Petitioner Versus SHAMS UL QAMAR — Respondent

Court: Peshawar
SCMR 2024
C.M.As. Nos. 597 and 598 of 2024 in I.C.As. Nos. 16 and 24 of 2023, decided on 11th July, 2024.

2024 S C M R 1952

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and another — Applicants Versus KARAMAT ALI and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
CLC 2017
2016-April-20

2017 C L C 1727

MANZOOR AHMED and 11 others — Petitioners Versus SHOUKAT PAPER MART through Proprietor and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Sindh
CLC 1981
First Appeal from Original Order No. 180 of 1980, decided on 2nd June, 1980.

1981 C L C 1066

GULAB SHAH‑Appellant Versus GHULAM HUSSAIN SHAH‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLD 2023
2023-January-27

P L D 2023 Supreme Court 273

IRFAN AZAM and others — Applicants Versus Mst. RABIA RAFIQUE and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
CLC 2002
First Appeal from Order No.230 of 2001, decided on 6th August, 2001.

2002 C L C 8

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Appellant Versus ABDUL QUDDUS and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
YLR 2016
Cr. Misc. Application No.D-133 of 2015, decided on 30th March, 2015.

2016 Y L R 546

DILDAR — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent

Court: Sindh