New Delhi, May 15 (FN Bureau) Supreme Court on Tuesday held that advocates cannot be sued for poor service before consumer courts, as the legal profession is unique and does not come under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.The court also said it would reconsider its previous judgement passed in the case of medical professionals who come under the Consumer Protection Act. A bench comprising Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal said the legal profession is unique and the nature of work is specialised and cannot be compared with other professions. The Court said the relationship between the advocate and client indicates unique attributes since the client has direct control over the advocate. The services by lawyers will not fall under the Consumer Protection Act and the litigants cannot make claims of deficiency of service against advocates, the bench held. “We will also relook into the judgement passed in 1996 in Indian Medical Association v. Shanta on medical negligence.” The bench said. The 1996 landmark judgment held that medical professionals would be accountable under the Consumer Protection Act and that the definition of ‘services’ under the Act would cover the healthcare and medical sector.
The court added that the contract is of personal service and is excluded from the definition of service under CPA. The relationship between advocate and client indicates unique attributes since the client has direct control over the advocate, the bench stated. “Advocates have to respect the client’s autonomy and are not entitled to make concessions without express instructions from the client and transgress authority. A considerable amount of direct control is with the client of advocate,” the Court said. “The very purpose of the Act was to protect consumers from unfair trade practices. there is nothing to suggest that the legislature wanted to include professionals,” the court said. “Having said that we have opined IMA vs Shanta decision needs to be revisited,” the Court stated. “Hence, the issue regarding the same be placed before the Chief Justice of India to be referred to a larger bench, “ the bench said. The issue regarding lawyers’ services arose from a 2007 verdict of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that held that such services come under their purview, saying that the monetary contract between a client and their lawyer is bilateral. An appeal was filed against the NCDRC order by the Bar of Indian Lawyers. The Apex court on April 13, 2009, had stayed the NCDRC ruling. Senior Advocate Narender Hooda and Advocate Jasbir Malik appeared on behalf of the Bar of Indian Lawyers.Senior Advocate V Giri served as the Amicus Curiae in the case.