BEFORE THE BAR COUNCIL OF THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::

HYDERABAD

DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE NO.III

Dated this 2nd day of August, 2008

Present: Shri Brahma Nanda Reddy, S., Chairman

Shri Ramanjaneyulu,P., Member
Shri Devanand B., Member

* * *

Complaint Case No. 7 of 2008

Between:

G.Shrisha, D/o G.Veerabhadaram,

H.No.1-7-1634, Srinivasa Colony,
Balasamudram, Hanamkonda,Warangal Dist. …. Complainant

and

Sri Palvai Ravinder Reddy,

Advocate,
H.No.12-13-588, Nagarjunanagar Colony,
Tarnaka, Hyderabad. …. Respondent

The case referred to the Disciplinary Committee No.III by the Bar Council of A.P.

under Sec. 35(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961 (Act No.25/1961).

This case coming on for consideration before the Disciplinary Committee No.III

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

The complainant filed the above complaint against the respondent stating

that she approached the respondent on 21-05-2007 to file case regarding conjugal

matter with her husband and that the respondent took her signatures on vakalat papers

and advance of Rs.10,000/- for filing the case in Ranga Reddy District Court. The

respondent gave case Nos. as FCA 186/07 & I.A.Nos. 275,276,277 and 288/2007 and

he did not give copy of the filed case. When the complainant approached the respondent,

the respondent is giving false statements and bluffing the issue. When enquired, no

such case numbers were found. When contacted on phone, the respondent was stating

1
that the papers are with his assistant and also demanding additional amount of

Rs.10,246/-. Hence, prayed to take proper action against the respondent.

2. Having received the notice in the said complaint, the respondent entered his

appearance in person and filed his defence affidavit denying the material allegations

made against him in the complaint. He further submitted that the complainant

approached him through his close friend Sri Marri Narayana Rao along with her father

Sri G.Veerabhadram on 20-04-2007 and on hearing the complainant’s version the

respondent found that there is no jurisdiction for filing criminal and civil cases at twin

cities or at Ranga Reddy District, since complainant is a resident of Warangal, her

husband is a non resident Indian residing at USA and her in-laws are resident of

Venkatagiri, Nellore District and she never stayed at Hyderabad along with her husband.

As per the instructions given by the complainant, the respondent in order to settle the

dispute by negotiations convened a meeting with Mr.Uday Kumar, brother of the

complainant’s husband, at Yatrinivas, Secundrabad along with Advocate Mr.M.Tataji. On

29-04-2007 the complainant convened another meeting at Tarnaka, Secundrabad and

then the complainant and her father mustered 10 to 15 unsocial elements to kidnap

Mr.Udai Kumar and the respondent having come to know of the same warned them.

The respondent also negotiated the matter with the husband of complainant through

phone. Counsel of Mr.Udai Kumar also got issued a legal notice in relation to the

incident held on 29-04-2007. Subsequently, the respondent did not contact the

complainant. The complaint is filed without any basis or without having any documentary

evidence. The complainant never paid him Rs.10,000/- nor did he demanded

Rs.10,246/- and that he never gave any case numbers and on 29-04-2007 the

respondent left for Chennai and returned back in the 1st week of July. The complainant

developed personal grudge against the respondent, as the meeting convened by him

with Mr.Uday Kumar met with failure and filed this complaint only to defame him.

3. After taking up the matter on file, notice was issued to both parties. On

01-03-2008 the complainant absent, no representation for the complainant. Sri

M.Polisetty and A.Vinod filed vakalat and for filing reply the matter was adjourned to

22-03-2008. On 22-03-2008, the complainant called absent and the respondent also

called absent. The matter is posted to 12-04-2008 for filing reply finally on payment of

2
costs of Rs.500/- to Bar Council. On 12-04-2008 the complainant called absent.

Respondent’s counsel Sri M.Polisetty filed statement of defence on behalf of the

respondent. The matter is posted to 07-06-2008 for framing of issues. On 07-06-2008,

Complainant called absent. The matter is posted to 12-07-2008 for dismissal. On

12-07-2008, the complainant called absent. Respondent called and his counsel present.

Intimation sent to the complainant was not returned. The matter is posted to 02-08-

2008 for dismissal. The complainant never appeared before this Committee.

4. Hence, the Committee feels that the complainant is not evincing any interest to

proceed with the case, though the matter is posted to framing of issues and for enquiry.

As such the complaint is dismissed for default.

6. Hence, the Committee feels that there is no point in pursuing the matter further

and it results only in waste of time and therefore the complaint is hereby dismissed.

Sd/- Shri Brahmananda Reddy, S, Chairman

Sd/- Shri Ramanjaneyulu P., Member
Sd/- Shri Devanand B., 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.III

-0oOo0-