LAWYERS COLLECTIVE Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.

(2.) The aforesaid question is to be dealt with in this petition in context of the following facts:

(3.) The activities carried on by Respondent Nos. 12 to 14 at present is required to be dealt with on the basis of statements made in the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the Respondents. In the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of Respondent No. 12 in reply to the Petition, it has been stated that consequent upon its application dated 15th June 1994, the Reserve Bank of India, vide its letter dated 6th July 1994 (Exhibit 2 to the said affidavit), granted to the 12th Respondent permission under Section 29(1)(a) of the FERA for opening a Liaison Office in India. It has been further stated in paragraph 2(f) of the affidavit that independent of the Liaison Office activities, the 12th Respondent has both before and since establishment of the Liaison Office received and fulfilled mandates to advise and assist non-Indian clients in connection with their activities in India and Indian clients in connection with their activities in India and outside India. This work consisted of drafting documents, reviewing and providing comments on documents, conducting negotiations and advising clients on international standards and customary practice relating to the client's transaction. It is, however, averred that the 12th Respondent does not advise clients on issues relating to Indian law but engages Indian lawyers to render such service.