Lawyer’s Service Rendered On Legal Side Not Covered Under Consumer Protection Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court was considering a petition of a man who had filed a complaint against an advocate alleging deficiency in service.
Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari, Justice Subhendu Samanta, Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed the view that an advocate/lawyer in connection with the service rendered by him on the legal side is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act.
The High Court was considering a petition of a man who had filed a complaint against an advocate alleging deficiency in service.
The Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Subhendu Samanta held, “The law is well settled that an Advocate/lawyer in connection with the service rendered by him in legal side is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act.”
Advocate Phani Babu Yalamanchili represented the Petitioner while Advocate Bonu Rama Sankar Rao represented the lawyer.
Factual Background
The petitioner had filed a complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (District Forum) against an advocate (fourth respondent) on the allegation of deficiency in service with respect to the suit filed at the instance of the petitioner. The District Forum dismissed the complaint on the merits. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Vijayawada (State Commission). The petitioner's Revision Petition was also dismissed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at New Delhi. The writ petition thus came to be filed challenging these orders.
Reasoning
The Bench referred to the judgment in Bar of Indian Lawyers v. D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases (2024) wherein the Apex Court had set aside the view taken by the NCDRC that in respect of deficiency in service rendered by the lawyers, a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 would be maintainable.
The Bench reiterated that an advocate/lawyer in connection with the service rendered by him in the legal field is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act.
Thus, holding that the complaint filed by the writ petitioner against the lawyer/advocate under the Consumer Protection Act was not maintainable, the Bench dismissed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: A.S.S.K. Durga Prasad v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Case No.: Writ Petition No.29425/202526)