CIC by relying upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in B.P Singhal vs. Union of India (2010) 6 SCC 331 and in CBSE vs. Aditya Bandhyopadhyay, (Civil Appeal No. 6454 of 2011) has held when information sought pertains to the legal opinion issued by the government appointed law officer to a public authority, the […]
Appellant had sought to know whether Harish who suffers from brain mind problem is competent to purchase property. PIO denied the information under section 8(1)(e) and (j) and CIC upheld the said decision.
Appellant had sought a copy of the legal opinion obtained by the Respondents, which the respondents had refused to disclose. CIC dismissed the appeal following its earlier observations made in its decision in case No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00073 dated 7.5.2007:¬ “The relationship between a Counsel and his client is customarily held to be fiduciary and the exchanges […]
CIC has held that information concerning the legal opinion submitted by the panel advocate of the bank, cannot be provided under the RTI Act as it involves a fiduciary relationship and is, therefore, exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (e) of the RTI Act.
Appellant had requested copies of legal opinion obtained from the bank’s lawyer and their Legal Department in respect of his legal notice, which was denied by the Bank under S.8(1)(e) of the RTI Act on the ground that it was held by it in a fiduciary capacity. Appellant stated that the information sought was in […]
Appellant had sought information regarding the opinion given by M/s Mulla & Mulla to Air India CIC held that in the instant case, the information sought by the appellant cannot be furnished without compromising or affecting the confidentiality and identity of the fiduciary, i.e. M/s Mulla & Mulla; that the matter is covered by Section […]