The SC in Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v. D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr. [2024] 6 S.C.R. 484 : 2024 INSC 410 held that having regard to the history, object, purpose and the scheme of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter ‘CP Act’) and that neither the “Profession” could be treated as “business” or “trade”, nor the services provided by the “Professionals” could be treated at par with the services provided by the Businessmen or the Traders, so as to bring them within the purview of the CP Act.
SC observed that following are some unique attributes of legal profession:
1)Advocates are generally perceived to be their client’s agents and owe fiduciary duties to their clients.
2)Advocates are fastened with all the traditional duties that agents owe to their principals. For example, Advocates have to respect the client’s autonomy to make decisions at a minimum, as to the objectives of the representation.
3)Advocates are not entitled to make concessions or give any undertaking to the Court without express instructions from the Client.
4)It is the solemn duty of an Advocate not to transgress the authority conferred on him by his Client.
5)An Advocate is bound to seek appropriate instructions from the Client or his authorized agent before taking any action or making any statement or concession which may, directly or remotely, affect the legal rights of the Client.
6)The Advocate represents the client before the Court and conducts proceedings on behalf of the client. He is the only link between the court and the client. Therefore, his responsibility is onerous. He is expected to follow the instructions of his client rather than substitute his judgment.
And further held that:
(i) The very purpose and object of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted in 2019 was to provide protection to the consumers from unfair trade practices and unethical business practices, and the Legislature never intended to include either the Professions or the services rendered by the Professionals within the purview of the said Act of 1986/2019.
(ii) The Legal Profession is sui generis i.e. unique in nature and cannot be compared with any other Profession.
(iii) A service hired or availed of an Advocate is a service under “a contract of personal service,” and therefore would fall within the exclusionary part of the definition of “Service” contained in Section 2 (42) of the CP Act 2019.
(iv) A complaint alleging “deficiency in service” against Advocates practising Legal Profession would not be maintainable under the CP Act, 2019.