Counsel Entitled To Fees Which Was Agreed To Be Adjusted From Receipt Of Compensation: Delhi High Court Dismisses Client’s Appeal
The Delhi High Court was considering a Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, Delhi High Court
While dismissing a client’s appeal in a matter where his counsel had kept the amount of compensation when he was required to fairly return the amount and then seek the sum of Rs 36,000 as his fee, the Delhi High Court has held that the counsel was entitled to fees which were agreed to be adjusted from the receipt of compensation.
The High Court was considering a Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) by the Plaintiff/Appellant, against the common Judgment and Decree passed by the ADJ whereby the defendant was held entitled to recovery of the fees in the sum of Rs 36,000, which was directed to be adjusted from the decree in favour of the plaintiff.
The Single Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held, “From the evidence, it emerges that the Plaintiff was liable to pay the fee to the Counsel, which never got paid by him. It was agreed between them that the fee would be adjusted from the compensation, as and when received by him. The amount was admittedly received in the Court on 25.04.2011, by C.S. Rathore. Unfortunately, he decided to keep the entire amount, while he was required to fairly to return the amount and then seek the sum of Rs.36,000/- as his fee, or adjust his fees and return the balance amount.”
Advocate B. Anand represented the Petitioner while the Respondent appeared in person.
Factual Background
The Plaintiff/ Appellant was employed with M/S Bass Electric Industry, and his services were terminated on October 10, 1993. The plaintiff challenged the Termination Order before the Court, which was disposed of. The Company did not comply with the Order of the High Court, and the plaintiff filed the Contempt Case. The Plaintiff had engaged the Defendant, C.S. Rathore, as his counsel in the said petition as well as in the Contempt Case. Whilst the Contempt proceedings were pending before this Court, the employer settled the dispute and paid a sum of Rs.80,000 to the Defendant/ Advocate of the plaintiff. Thus, the Contempt Petition was dismissed as not pressed.
The Defendant sent only the draft of Rs.20,000 by post to the Plaintiff and did not hand over the balance Rs.60,000 i.e. cash amount. Despite several requests made by the plaintiff, the defendant refused to pay the amount of Rs 60,000. Thereafter, the Plaintiff sent a Legal Notice to the Defendant. A Complaint was also filed in the Bar Council of Delhi, though no action was taken against the Defendant. Hence, the Plaintiff filed the Suit for recovery of Rs. 60,000 along with interest @24% till its realisation, as well as for litigation expenses for an amount of Rs. 25,000. The Defendant filed a Written Statement as well as a Counter Claim stating that the amount of Rs. 80,000 was paid to the Plaintiff, in its entirety. He asserted that the plaintiff undertook to pay the fee to the defendant at the time of obtaining a favourable Order from this Court, but the plaintiff was not paid the professional fee of Rs. 36,000 (Rs 25000 for the Writ Petition and Rs 11000 for contesting the Civil Contempt Petition) by the defendant. Thus, he denied the liability to pay Rs. 60,000, but claimed his professional fee of Rs. 36,000, by way of the Counter-Claim.
Litigation ensued, and the District Judge concurred with the findings of the Civil Judge that the Respondent, not having received the entire amount of Rs. 60,000 from the Appellant, was established. Thus, the Appeal preferred by C.S. Rathore against the decree of the Suit was dismissed. It was held that C.S. Rathore was entitled to recovery of the Rs 36,000 fees, which was directed to be adjusted from the decree in favour of the plaintiff, and the balance of Rs 24,000 after deduction of the fees amount was payable to the plaintiff, and the Counter-claim was accordingly decreed. Aggrieved by the decree of the counterclaim, the Second Regular Appeal under Section 100 CPC was filed by the appellant.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench found that the Plaintiff was liable to pay the fee to the Counsel, which was never paid by him. It was agreed between them that the fee would be adjusted from the compensation, as and when received by him. The amount was admittedly received in the Court by C.S. Rathore, but he decided to keep the entire amount, while he was required to fairly return the amount and then seek the sum of Rs 36,000 as his fee, or adjust his fees and return the balance amount.
The Bench held, “From the aforesaid circumstances, as has been rightly observed by the learned ADJ, it is proved that Plaintiff had not paid the professional fee to C.S. Rathore, which had been agreed as Rs.25,000/- for the Writ Petition and Rs.11,000/- for the Contempt Petition. While the conduct of Mr. Rathore was unfair in having retained the entire amount of Rs.60,000/- instead of adjusting his fee, the fact remains that the Plaintiff/Appellant had also not led any evidence, to show that the professional fee was ever paid to C.S. Rathore.”
As per the Bench, the ADJ had rightly concluded that the professional fee of Rs 36,000 as agreed by the Plaintiff, was never paid by him to the Defendant. The Bench noted that the oral evidence sufficiently established that the Plaintiff failed to pay the professional fee, as was settled by them. The Plaintiff nowhere, either in his pleadings or in the evidence, stated even an iota about the fee agreed or how and on what date he had paid the professional fee.
Thus, affirming the order of the ADJ, the Bench dismissed the Second Appeal.
Cause Title: Prem Singh v. C.S. Rathore (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:5084)