If doctors can be sued over poor service, why not lawyers, asks SC
By
Utkarsh Anand
, New Delhi
Feb 15, 2024 01:47 AM IST

There are at least 1.3 million lawyers, according to statistics with Bar Council of India, apex body to regulate legal education and profession in India.

Why can’t lawyers be sued for poor service if doctors can be brought before consumer courts for negligence? The Supreme Court raised this question on Wednesday as it began hearing a clutch of petitions about whether legal representation for a fee can be classified as a “service” under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

A view of the Supreme Court of India (SCI) building, in New Delhi. (ANI)

“You (lawyer) have to also employ your skills and knowledge in the facts of that case… like a doctor does with a patient. How is it any different from a doctor?” asked a bench of justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, as it started to consider several petitions that questioned the views taken by the national consumer commission in 2007.
Discover the thrill of cricket like never before, exclusively on HT. Explore now!
In its 2007 judgment, the commission held that advocates do come under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act and can be dragged to a consumer court by their clients for deficiency in service. The judgment declared that the legal services rendered by lawyers would come within the ambit of Section 2(1)(o) of the 1986 Act that defines “service”, making them liable under the law.

PROMOTED
My Son Is Only 2-YO, He Might Not Survive Please Help!
Ketto
|
Sponsored
This Is How People Over 35 Lose Weight Fast (watch)
Burn Fat Fast
|
Sponsored
Sachin Pilot gulping poison like Shiv, Priyanka Gandhi insulted: Acharya Pramod Krishnam
Hindustan Times
G – Shock – Rise above the shock
Casio
|
Sponsored
Poonam Pandey and Sam Bombay slapped with ₹100 crore defamation lawsuit: Report
Hindustan Times
Here Are The New Bathroom Remodeling Trends In 2024 (See Prices)
Latest Bathroom Remodeling Trends 2024
|
Sponsored
Top Breast Lift Clinics In Mexico (See Prices)
Breast Lift I Search Ads
|
Sponsored
If your vision is blurry, use this method from leading experts
Healthy eyes
|
Sponsored
“Undisputedly, lawyers are rendering service. They are charging fees. It is not a contract of personal service. Therefore, there is no reason to hold that they are not covered by the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act,1986,” the consumer commission held in its 2007 judgment that was stayed by the top court in April 2009.
Commencing the arguments on behalf of the appellants that comprised several lawyer bodies, senior counsel Narender Hooda objected to the rationale of the 2007 judgment, arguing lawyers stand on a completely different footing from any other professionals, including doctors.
“The first duty of a lawyer is towards the court since he has to act as an officer of the court. There is no one-to-one relationship that a lawyer has with his clients. Further, success in a case does not depend only on the skills of a lawyer but it will depend on courts,” argued Hooda.

Disagreeing, the bench replied: “If a lawyer does not remain present in the court and an ex parte decree is passed against his client. The lawyer does not even tell his client why the case was dismissed. Who will be responsible for this? For this kind of negligence, the court doesn’t come in the picture at all.”
While Hooda said that there is already a mechanism under the Advocates Act to conduct an inquiry against lawyers for misconduct, the bench retorted: “Negligence and misconduct are two different concepts. How do you differentiate your profession from doctors? They also have their own regulations under the Medical Council of India Act and still they come under the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act.”

Responding, Hooda said that attributing negligence or deficiency to lawyers will expose them to two different actions – one, under the Advocates Act, and second, under the consumer law.
The bench, however, replied: “In that case, a court can always decide whether it’s professional misconduct or negligence. There’s a difference between professional misconduct and professional negligence and the court can adjudicate that depending on the facts of a case.”
To this, Hooda contended: “It’s different from doctors. When a doctor operates on a patient inside an operating theatre, nobody is watching. But a lawyer conducts his operation, it is in full public glare…Every unhappy client will then pursue a case before the consumer court.”
But the bench commented: “Every argument you are making is true for doctors too. But they (doctors) are made to face cases before consumer courts…and then you cannot prevent anyone from filing a frivolous or false case. That’s true for all professions and professionals.”

Adjourning the case to Thursday for hearing it further, the court told Hooda that he would have to explicate how lawyers are different from doctors in providing services. Senior counsel V Giri, who assists the court as amicus curiae, will also present his views on Thursday.
There are at least 1.3 million lawyers in India, according to statistics with the Bar Council of India, the apex body to regulate legal education and profession in the country.
The 2007 judgment by the national consumer commission said that a lawyer may not be responsible for the favourable outcome of a case because the result does not depend upon only a lawyer’s work. The commission also held that a lawyer and a client have a bilateral contract. “On receipt of fees, a lawyer would appear and represent the matter on behalf of his client. To hold that contract is unilateral is to ignore the fact that even after discussion, the client may not engage the advocate or the advocate may refuse to accept the brief. Hence, such a contract can never be said to be unilateral,” stated the commission.

By an order on April 13, 2009, the top court had put the national commission’s order in abeyance. “There shall be stay of the impugned order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, during the pendency of the appeals,” the court order had stated.
— Read on www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/if-doctors-can-be-sued-over-poor-service-why-not-lawyers-asks-sc-101707934624251.html