LCI Learning
Master the Art of Contract Drafting & Corporate Legal Work with Adv Navodit Mehra. Register Now!

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Lawyers not liable under consumer Act: SC

ravidevaraj
Last updated: 15 April 2009
 less than a minute    Share   Bookmark


Bar of Indian Lawyers vs. D. K. Gandhi (Supreme Court) The State Commission, Delhi, held that services rendered by a Lawyer would not come within the ambit of s. 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as the client executes the power of attorney authorizing the Counsel to do certain acts on his behalf and there is no term of contract as to the liability of the lawyer in case he fails to do any such act. The State Commission held that it is a unilateral contract executed by the client giving authority to the lawyer to appear and represent the matter on his behalf without any specific assurance or undertaking. This verdict was reversed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on the ground that lawyers are rendering a service. They are charging fees. It is not a contract of personal service and that there was no reason to hold that they are not covered by the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It was held that though a Lawyer may not be responsible for the favourable outcome of a case as the result/out come does not depend upon only on lawyers’ work, but, if there was deficiency in rendering services promised, for which consideration in the form of fee is received by him, then the lawyers can be proceeded against under the Consumer Protection Act. The said judgement of the NCDRC has now been stayed by the Supreme Court.
"Loved reading this piece by ravidevaraj?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"






Tags :


Category Corporate Law, Other Articles by - ravidevaraj 



Comments

16 years ago A. A. JOSE

Dear All, It is prudent to be concious of the fact that the NCDRC's judgement has merely been stayed, but not quashed and set aside by the SC. Therefore, it is felt that we should have patience to wait for the final outcome. However, personally I am of the firm view that if there is any defiency in rendering service, Lawyers should and could be proceeded against under the Consumer Protect Act. Considering the wide coverage of the said Act and the objects of the same, it would not be correct to say that service rendered by the Lawyer is beyond the ambit of the C.P. Act. Of course, final verdict of the SC would only make the issue clear.


16 years ago Nitin

Dear All, The issue regarding lawyers being held responsible/liable for the deficiency in their services offered to their clients touches the roots of their relationship with their clients and so needs a deep analyses and needs to adequately addressed by an act of parliament only.


16 years ago N.K.Assumi

Vakalat and Power of attorney are similar, but similarity does not mean the same and they are two distinct and different documents. It is beyound our wildest dream that accepting vakalat would mean that Lawyer is the agent of the Client like the agent and principal in the power of attorney.The issue is very important and anxiously awaiting the Hon'ble Supreme Court's verdict.




You are not logged in . Please login to post comments.

Click here to Login / Register