Holding

Services hired or availed of an advocate constitute a contract of personal service and are excluded from the definition of "service" under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, rendering the complaint non‑maintainable.

Summary

The Bar of Indian Lawyers filed a civil appeal challenging a National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) order that allowed a consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service against an advocate. The appellant argued that legal services are a "contract of personal service" and therefore fall within the exclusionary clause of the definition of "service" under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (re‑enacted in 2019). The Court examined the legislative intent of the CP Acts, the sui generis nature of the legal profession, and the control exercised by clients over advocates. It held that the legislature never intended to bring professional services, especially those of lawyers, within the ambit of consumer protection law. Consequently, the services of an advocate are excluded from the definition of "service" and a complaint under the CP Act is not maintainable. The NCDRC judgment was set aside and the appeals were allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a complaint alleging deficiency in service against an advocate is maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019.
Whether the services of an advocate fall within the definition of "service" under s.2(1)(o) of the 1986 Act and s.2(42) of the 2019 Act.
Whether the legislature intended to include professional services, particularly legal services, within the scope of the Consumer Protection Acts.
Whether the legal profession is sui generis and thus exempt from consumer protection law.
Whether the relationship between advocate and client constitutes a "contract of personal service" excluded by the Act.

Legislation cited

Advocates Act, 1961s. 2(1)(a), s. 2(1)(i), s. 29, s. 30
Code of Civil Procedures. Order III, s. Section 2(15)
Consumer Protection Act, 1986s. 2(1)(g), s. 2(1)(o)
Consumer Protection Act, 2019s. 2(11), s. 2(42)

Subjects

Consumer Protection ActDeficiency in serviceLegal professionSui generisContract of personal serviceAdvocates ActProfessional services exclusionConsumer lawLegislative intentBar Council of India

Judgment

[2024] 6 S.C.R. 484 : 2024 INSC 410

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President
Jasbir Singh Malik
v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of
Communicable Diseases and Anr.
(Civil Appeal No. 2646 of 2009)
14 May 2024
[Bela M. Trivedi* and Pankaj Mithal,* JJ.]

Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to whether a complaint alleging “deficiency in
service” against advocates practising legal profession, would be
maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as re-
enacted in 2019; whether “Service” hired or availed of an advocate
would fall within the definition of “Service” contained in the C.P.
Act, 1986/2019; whether the legislature ever intended to include
the professions or services rendered by the professionals within
the purview of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted in 2019; whether the
legal profession is sui generis; and whether service hired or availed
of an advocate could be said to be the service under “contract of
personal service” so as to exclude it from the definition of “Service”
contained in s. 2(42) of the CP Act 2019.

Headnotes†
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Consumer Protection Act,
2019 – Complaint alleging “deficiency in service” against
Advocates practising Legal Profession – Maintainability –
District Forum held that it had the jurisdiction to adjudicate
upon the dispute between the parties and decided the
complaint in favour of the complainant – However, the State
Commission held that the services of lawyers/advocates did
not fall within the ambit of “service” defined u/s. 2(1)(o) of
the 1986 Act – In Revision, the National Commission held
inter alia that if there was any deficiency in service rendered
by the Advocates/Lawyers, a complaint under the 1986 Act
would be maintainable – Correctness:
Held: Services hired or availed of an Advocate would be that of
a contract ‘of personal service’ and would thus, stand excluded
from the definition of “service” contained in the s. 2(42) of the CP
* Author
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 485

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

Act, 2019 – In view thereof, the complaint alleging “deficiency in
service” against Advocates practising legal profession would not
be maintainable under the CP Act, 2019 – Thus, the impugned
judgment passed by the National Commission set aside [Paras
42, 43] – Held: Per Pankaj Mithal, J. (Concurring) In the era of
globalization, a law has to be applied in context with the prevailing
situation of the country, nonetheless, on the basis of the common
resolution of the UNO, laws must have a uniform application in
all nations – It is, thus, essential that the consumer protection
laws in all countries may somewhat have universal application
and be confined to ‘consumers’ only i.e. to the persons who buys
any goods for consideration or hires or avails of any service
for consideration, impliedly excluding the professional services
especially that of a lawyer – In doing so, in India also the services of
professionals more particularly that of lawyers have to be excluded
from consumer protection law in accordance with the intention
expressed in enacting the same – Legislature in India as in some
other countries, had not intended to include the services rendered
by the professionals especially the lawyers to their client within
the purview of CP Act, 1986 and re-enacted in 2019 – Thus, the
view taken by the National Commission that complaint would be
maintainable in CP Act, 1986, in respect of deficiency in service
rendered by the lawyers, is incorrect and is set aside. [Paras 24-28]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Consumer Protection Act,
2019 – Legislature, if intended to include the Professions or
services rendered by the Professionals within the purview
of the CP Act 1986/2019:
Held: 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 – Legislature
never intended to include either the Professions or the services
rendered by the Professionals within the purview of the said Acts
– Other object of the Act was to provide to the consumers timely
and effective administration and settlement of their disputes arising
out of the unfair trade and unethical business practices – If the
services provided by all the Professionals are also brought within
the purview of the Act, there would be flood-gate of litigations
in the commissions/forums established under the Act, and the
very object of Act would be frustrated – Legislative draftsmen
are presumed to know the law and there is no reason to assume
that the legislature intended to include the Professions or the
486 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

Professionals or the services provided by them within the ambit
of the CP Act – Any interpretation of the Preamble or the scheme
of the Act for construing ‘Profession’ as ‘Business’ or ‘Trade’; or
‘Professional’ as ‘service provider’ would be extending the scope
of the Act which was not intended, rather would have a counter
productive effect. [Paras 42, 19, 20, 18]
Legal Profession – Legal Profession is sui generis or is
different from the other Profession:
Held: Having regard to the role, status and duties of the Advocates
as the professionals, the legal profession is sui generis i.e unique in
nature and cannot be compared with any other profession – Legal
profession is different from the other professions for the reason that
what the Advocates do, affects not only an individual but the entire
administration of justice, which is the foundation of the civilized
society – Legal profession is a solemn and serious profession,
and has always been held in very high esteem – Their services
in making the judicial system efficient, effective and credible, and
in creating a strong and impartial Judiciary, which could not be
compared with the services rendered by other professionals [Paras
42, 30] – Held: Per Pankaj Mithal, J. (Concurring) Profession of
law, as such, is regarded as sui generis i.e. which is unique – It is
distinct from all other professions and is one of its own kind. [Para 3]
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – s. 2(42) – Service hired or
availed of an Advocate, if could be said to be the service
under a “contract of personal service” so as to exclude it
from the definition of “Service” contained in s. 2(42):
Held: Service hired or availed of an Advocate is a service under
“a contract of personal service,” and thus, would fall within the
exclusionary part of the definition of “Service” contained in s.
2(42) – Greater the amount of direct control exercised over the
person rendering the services by the person contracting for them,
the stronger would be the grounds for holding it to be a “contract
of service” – Considerable amount of direct control is exercised
by the Client over the manner in which an Advocate renders his
services during the course of his employment. [Paras 42, 39, 41]
Reference to larger Bench – Three-Judge Bench decision in
*Indian Medical Association vs. V.P. Shantha & Others holding
inter alia that the wide amplitude of the definition of ‘service’ in
the main part of s. 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 487

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

would cover the services rendered by Medical Practitioners
within the said s. 2(1)(o) of the Act – Correctness:
Held: Having regard to the history, object, purpose and the
scheme of the 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, the decision in *Indian Medical
Association vs. V.P Shantha’s case to be revisited and considered
by a larger bench – Thus, matter referred to Hon’ble the Chief
Justice of India for consideration – Supreme Court Rules – Order
VI r 2. [Paras 21, 24]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Consumer Protection Act,
2019 – Scope and object of – Intention of the legislature:
Held: The said Act was enacted to provide for the better protection
of the interests of the consumers against their exploitation by the
traders and manufacturers of the consumer goods, and to help
consumers in getting justice and fair treatment in the matter of
goods and services purchased and availed by them in a market
dominated by large trading and manufacturing bodies – Reasons
for re-enacting the CP Act, 2019 by the Legislature, were certain
shortcomings found in the CP Act 1986 while administering the
said Act, and due to the emergence of global supply chains, rise in
international trade and rapid development of ecommerce leading to
new systems for goods and services, new options and opportunities
had become available to the consumers – New forms of unfair
trade and unethical business practices also came to be developed,
which made the consumers more vulnerable – Furthermore, there
was not a whisper in the statement of objects and reasons either
of the CP Act, 1986 or 2019 to include the Professions or the
Services provided by the Professionals like Advocates, Doctors
etc. within the purview of the Act – Professionals could not be
called Businessmen or Traders, nor Clients or Patients be called
Consumers. [Paras 12, 14, 15]
Words and phrases – Definition of term “Profession” –
Meaning and explanation of:
Held: “Profession” would require advanced education and training
in some branch of learning or science – Nature of work is also
skilled and specialised one, substantial part of which would be
488 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

mental rather than manual – Thus, having regard to the nature
of work of a professional, which requires high level of education,
training and proficiency and which involves skilled and specialized
kind of mental work, operating in the specialized spheres, where
achieving success would depend upon many other factors beyond
a man’s control, a Professional cannot be treated equally or at
par with a Businessman or a Trader or a Service provider of
products or goods as contemplated in the Consumer Protection
Act – Similarly, services rendered by Businessman or Trader
to consumers with regard to his goods or products cannot be
equated with the Services provided by Professional to his clients
with regard to his specialized branch of profession. [Paras 15, 18]
Legal profession – Justice Delivery System and the evolving
jurisprudence – Role of Advocates:
Held: Legal profession cannot be equated with any other traditional
professions – It is not commercial in nature but is essentially
a service oriented, noble profession – Role of Advocates is
indispensable in the Justice Delivery System – Evolution of
jurisprudence to keep the Constitution vibrant is possible only
with the positive contribution of the Advocates – Advocates are
expected to be fearless and independent for protecting the rights
of citizens, for upholding the Rule of law and also for protecting
the Independence of Judiciary – People repose immense faith in
the Judiciary, and the Bar being an integral part of the Judicial
System has been assigned a very crucial role for preserving the
independence of the Judiciary, and in turn the very democratic set
up of the Nation – Advocates are perceived to be the intellectuals
amongst the elites and social activists amongst the downtrodden,
thus are expected to act with utmost good faith, integrity, fairness
and loyalty while handling the legal proceedings of his client –
Being a responsible officer of the court and an important adjunct
of the administration of justice, an Advocate owes his duty not only
to his client but also to the court as well as to the opposite side
[Para 29] – Held: Per Pankaj Mithal, J. (Concurring) Profession
of law is a noble profession having an element of duty towards
the court – Lawyers perform multi-faceted duties – They not
only have a duty towards the client or their opponents but they
have a paramount duty to assist the court as well – In a way,
they are officers as well as ambassadors of the court – Thus, in
rendering such kind of a duty to enable the courts to come to a
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 489

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

just conclusion, it may be possible that at times, the lawyers may
earn displeasure of the client while assisting the court. [Para 2]
Advocates Act, 1961 – Advocate – Legal Practitioner –
Definition of, and explanation:
Held: Advocate is included in the definition of “Legal Practitioner”
but legal practitioner is not included in the definition of Advocate
– Advocate is one who has been entered in any roll under the
provisions of the Advocates Act – Law relating to legal practitioners
and to provide for the constitution of Bar Councils and an All-India
Bar is covered under the Advocates Act, 1961 – As per s. 29, there
is only one class of persons entitled to practice the profession of law,
namely Advocates, and as per s. 30, every advocate whose name is
entered in the State roll is entitled as of right to practice in all Courts
including the Supreme Court and before any Tribunal or any other
authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any
law for the time being in force entitled to practice – Comprehensive
provisions are contained in the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar
Council of India Rules to take care of the professional misconduct of
the Advocates, and prescribing the punishments if they are found guilty
of professional or other misconduct by the Disciplinary Committees
of the State Bar Council or the Bar Council of India. [Para 34]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s. 2(1)(o) – Consumer
Protection Act, 2019 – s. 2(42) – Definition of “Service”
contained in s. 2(1)(o) of the CP Act 1986 and in s. 2(42) of
the CP Act 2019 – Elucidation:
Held: Definition of “Service” contained in s. 2(1)(o) of the CP Act
1986 and in s. 2(42) of the CP Act 2019 is the same – Definition
of ‘service’ is divided into three parts-first part is explanatory in
nature and defines service to mean service of any description
which is made available to the potential users; the second part
is inclusionary part, which expressly includes the provision of
facilities in connection with the specific services; and the third part
is exclusionary part which excludes rendering of any service free
of charge or under a contract of personal service. [Paras 35, 37]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s. 2(1)(g) – Consumer
Protection Act, 2019 – s. 2(11) – Definition of ‘Deficiency’ in
s. 2(1)(g) of 1986 Act and s. 2(11) of 2019 Act:
Held: There is slight difference in the definition of ‘Deficiency’ in
s. 2(1)(g) of 1986 Act and s. 2(11) of 2019 Act. [Para 36]
490 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

Advocates – Relationship between an Advocate and his
Client – Nature of control – Unique attributes:
Held : Advocates are generally perceived to be their client’s agents
and owe fiduciary duties to their clients – Advocates are fastened
with all the traditional duties that agents owe to their principals –
Advocates have to respect the client’s autonomy to make decisions
at a minimum, as to the objectives of the representation – Advocates
are not entitled to make concessions or give any undertaking to the
Court without express instructions from the Client – It is the solemn
duty of an Advocate not to transgress the authority conferred on him
by his Client – 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 – 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 –
Thus, his responsibility is onerous – He is expected to follow the
instructions of his client rather than substitute his judgment – Thus,
a considerable amount of direct control is exercised by the Client
over the manner in which an Advocate renders his services during
the course of his employment. [Para 41]
Consumer Protection Laws – Exclusion of lawyers from
Consumer Protection Laws – International practice/norms –
Discussed. [Paras 6-9, 13-15, 17, 24] Per Pankaj Mithal, J.
(Concurring)

Case Law Cited

In the judgment of Bela M. Trivedi, J.
Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha & Others
[1995] Supp. 5 SCR 110 : (1995) 6 SCC 651 – To be
revisited.
State of Karnataka v. Vishwabharathi House Building
Coop. Society and Others [2003] 1 SCR 397 : (2003)
2 SCC 412; Common Cause, A Registered Society v.
Union of India and Others [1993] 1 SCR 10 : (1997) 10
SCC 729; Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta
[1993] Supp. 3 SCR 615 : (1994) 1 SCC 243; Laxmi
Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial Institute [1995]
3 SCR 174 : (1995) 3 SCC 583; State of West Bengal
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 491

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

v. Subodh Gopal Bose & Others [1954] 1 SCR 587 :
AIR 1954 SC 92; Triveniben v. State of Gujarat [1989] 1
SCR 509 : (1989) 1 SCC 678; Byram Pestonji Gariwala
v. Union Bank of India and Others [1991] Supp. 1 SCR
187 : (1992) 1 SCC 31; R. Muthukrishnan v. Registrar
General, High Court of Judicature at Madras [2019] 1
SCR 589 : (2019) 16 SCC 407; State of U.P and Others
v. U.P. State Law Officers Association and Others [1994]
1 SCR 348 : (1994) 2 SCC 204; Dharangadhra Chemical
Works Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra and Others [1957] 1
SCR 152 : AIR 1957 SC 264; Himalayan Cooperative
Group Housing Society v. Balwan Singh and Others
[2015] 4 SCR 616 : (2015) 7 SCC 373 – referred to.
Simmons v. Heath Laundry Company (1924) 1 KB
762 – referred to.

In the judgment of Pankaj Mithal, J.
Om Prakash v. Assistant Engineer, Haryana Agro
Industries Corporation Ltd. and Anr. [1994] 3 SCR
463: (1994) 3 SCC 504; Laureate Buildwell (P) Ltd. v.
Charanjeet Singh [2021] 6 SCR 673 : (2021) 20 SCC
401 – referred to.
D’Orta-Ekenaike v. Victoria Legal Aid (2005) 223 CLR 1.

Books and Periodicals Cited
In the judgment of Bela M Trivedi, J.
Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition; “Jackson and
Powell on Professional Liability” 2nd supplement to the
7th edition – referred to.

List of Acts
Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Consumer Protection Act, 2019;
Legal Practitioners Act, 1879; Bombay Pleaders Act, 1920; Indian
Bar Councils Act, 1926; Advocates Act, 1961; Supreme Court Rules.

List of Keywords
Deficiency in service; Service hired or availed of an Advocate;
Definition of Service; Professions or services rendered by the
Professionals; Legal Profession, sui generis; Service under contract
492 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

of personal service; Unfair trade practices and unethical business
practices; Timely and effective settlement of consumers’ disputes;
‘Profession’ as ‘Business’ or ‘Trade’; ‘Professional’ as ‘service
provider’; Exclusionary part of the definition of “Service”; Reference
to larger Bench; Decision to be revisited; Justice Delivery System;
Role of Advocates; Independence of Judiciary; Relationship
between an Advocate and his Client; International practices; Duty
of advocates/lawyers towards the court.

Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2646 of 2009
From the Judgment and Order dated 06.08.2007 of the National
Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in RP
No.1392 of 2006
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 2647, 2648 and 2649 of 2009, Civil Appeal No. 6959
of 2011 and Civil Appeal No. 8214 of 2017
Appearances for Parties
Guru Krishna Kumar, Narender Hooda, Manoj Swarup, Rakesh
Tikku, V. Giri, Jaideep Gupta, Shekhar Naphade, Dr. Adish C.
Aggarwala, Sukumar Pattjoshi, Arijit Prasad, Jayant Bhushan,
Dinesh Kumar Goswami, S. Wasim Ahmed Quadri, Vikas Singh,
Ramkrishna Viraragvan, Vivek Subba Reddy, V.K. Singh, Sr. Advs.,
Ashok Kumar Singh, Shantwanu Singh, Ms. Pragya Singh, Akshay
Singh, Rahul Dubey, Daya Krishan Sharma, D K Sharma, Rohit
Vats, Yashdeep, Akshay Amritanshu, Samyak Jain, Ayush Raj, Ankit
Swarup, Neelmani Pant, Ms. Apoorva Singh, Rishi Bhargava, Ms.
Yashvi Aswani, Jasbir Singh Malik, Ms. Chandni Sharma, Shaurya
Lamba, Varun Punia, K. Maruthi Rao, Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari, Gaurav
Yadava, Mohinder Jit Singh, Hardik Rupal, Satyam Aneja, Ms.
Suveni Bhagat, Ms. Vishwaja Rao, Rahul Narang, Harshed Sundar,
Nihar Dharmahikari, Shubham Rana, Piyush Goel, Mrs. Sunita
Sharma, Ms. N. Annapoorani, Devvrat, Manoj K. Mishra, Snehashish
Mukherjee, Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Puneet Singh Bindra, Sachin
Sharma, Ms. Harshita Sharma, Ms. Sachita Chawla, Ms. Swati
Setia, Devesh Kumar Agnihotri, Rohit Pandey, Meenesh Kumar
Dubey, Ms. Yugandhara Pawar Jha, Amrendra Kumar Singh, Vibhu
Shanker Mishra, Kumar Gaurav, Shashank Shekhar, Vikas Gupta,
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 493

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

Pratap Venugopal, Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, Manish Goswami,
Upendra Mishra, Ratnesh Kumar, Meghraj Singh, Pradeep Kumar
Yadav, Pankaj Kumar, Pankaj Singh, Munawwar Naseem, Siddharth,
Mukes Kumar, Subhendu Adikari, Siddharth Batra, Rhythm Katyal,
Ms. Archna Yadav, Chinmay Dubey, Ms. Shivani Chawla, Pratyush
Arora, Ashutosh Chugh, Rajesh Srivastava, Gaurav Verma, M/S.
Krishna & Nishani Law Chambers, Anil C Nishani, H. M. Harish,
Krishna M Singh, Nikhil Jain, Rajiv Kumar, K Krishna Kumar, Vishwesh
R Murnal, P. Prasanna Kumar, Ajit Achappa, Kiran Kumar, Hitesh
Kumar Sharma, S.K. Rajora, Akhileshwar Jha, Amit Kumar Chawla,
Sandeep Singh Dhingra, Ms. Niharika Dewivedi, Ms. Priya Singh,
Sanjay Singh, Ms. Kavita Singh, Advs. for the appearing parties.
Petitioner-in-person
Respondent-in-person
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Bela M. Trivedi, J.
1. An important question of law pertaining to the Legal Profession as a
whole that has fallen for consideration before this Court is – whether a
complaint alleging “deficiency in service” against Advocates practising
Legal Profession, would be maintainable under the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 as re-enacted in 2019? In other words, whether
a “Service” hired or availed of an Advocate would fall within the
definition of “Service” contained in the C.P. Act, 1986/2019, so as
to bring him within the purview of the said Act?
2. The present set of Appeals emanate from the impugned order dated
06.08.2007 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission (NCDRC), New Delhi in Revision Petition No.1392/2006,
in which the NCDRC has held inter alia that if there was any deficiency
in service rendered by the Advocates/Lawyers, a complaint under
the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “CP Act, 1986”) would
be maintainable.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. The short facts in C.A. No.2649/2009, arising out of the impugned
order passed by the NCDRC are that: -
494 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

(i) The appellant is an Advocate by profession. The respondent
Mr. D.K. Gandhi had hired the services of the appellant as an
advocate for filing a Complaint in the Court of Metropolitan
Magistrate, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, against one Kamal Sharma
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the
cheque for Rs.20,000/- issued by the said Kamal Sharma in
favour of the respondent D.K. Gandhi was dishonoured.
(ii) During the course of the said complaint case, the accused
Mr. Sharma agreed to pay the sum of Rs.20,000/- for the
dishonoured cheque besides Rs.5,000/- as the expenses
incurred by the complainant. It was alleged by the respondent
(complainant) that though the appellant had received from the
accused Mr. Sharma the DD/pay order for Rs.20,000/- and
the crossed cheque of Rs.5,000/- on behalf of the respondent,
the appellant did not deliver the same to the respondent and
instead demanded Rs.5,000/- in cash from the respondent.
The appellant also filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5,000/- in the
court of Small Causes, Delhi raising a plea that the sum was
due to him as his fees. Subsequently, the appellant gave the
DD/pay order for Rs.20,000/- and cheque for Rs.5,000/- to the
respondent, however, the payment of cheque for Rs.5,000/-
was stopped by the accused Mr. Sharma at the instance of the
appellant. The respondent therefore filed a complaint before the
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Delhi seeking
compensation of Rs. 15,000/- in addition to the amount of
cheque of Rs.5,000/-, as also Rs.10,000/- for the mental agony
and harassment along with the cost. The appellant resisted
the said complaint by filing a reply on 03.03.1998 raising a
preliminary objection to the effect that the District Consumer
Forum had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute raised in
the complaint as the Advocates were not covered under the
provisions contained in the CP Act.
(iii) The District Forum, however, rejected the said preliminary
objection, holding that it had the jurisdiction to adjudicate
upon the dispute between the parties and further decided the
complaint in favour of the respondent. The appellant being
aggrieved by the said order had filed an appeal before the State
Commission, which by the order dated 10.03.2006 allowed the
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 495

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

same holding that the services of lawyers/advocates did not
fall within the ambit of “service” defined under section 2(1)(o)
of the CP Act, 1986. The NCDRC, however in the Revision
Application preferred by the respondent passed the impugned
order as stated hereinabove.
(iv) Being aggrieved by the said impugned order passed by the
NCDRC, the present set of appeals has been filed by the Bar of
Indian Lawyers, Delhi High Court Bar Association, Bar Council
of India, and by the appellant M. Mathias.
SUBMISSIONS
4. Since the issues involved in this batch of Appeals pertain to the
Advocates practising in the various courts/tribunals and other legal
forums of the country, a wide range of arguments were advanced
before us. Having regard to the significance and sensitivity of the
issues involved, we had appointed the learned Senior Advocate, Mr.
V. Giri as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court.
5. The broad submissions made by the learned Senior Counsels Mr.
Narender Hooda, Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Mr. Manoj Swarup, Mr.
Manan Mishra, Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Mr. Vikas
Singh and learned counsel, Mr. D.K. Sharma may be summarized
as under: -
(i) The Advocates Act, 1961 is a law dealing exclusively with the
legal profession which provides a robust mechanism laying
down professional standards for compliance and for determining
professional misconduct.
(ii) The legal profession is a noble profession and not a business
or trade. It is an extension of system of justice, and the success
of judicial process depends on the independence of the Bar.
Hence, its autonomy is needed to preserve the democracy and
to keep judiciary strong.
(iii) A unique feature which distinguishes an Advocate from other
professional is that an Advocate has a duty to the court and
his peers, in addition to his duty to the client. He is not mere
a mouthpiece but he has to exercise his own judgment for
upholding the interest of his client by all fair, legal and reasonable
means, and by being respectful to the court.
496 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

(iv) The Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils are invested
with the disciplinary powers. An error of judgment or mere
negligence may not be a professional misconduct. In any
case, the professional misconduct which subsumes cases of
negligence, which is covered by the special law i.e., Advocates
Act, 1961.
(v) The Advocates Act being special law would prevail over the CP
Act so far as the conduct of Advocates are concerned.
(vi) The law of negligence recognizes that a professional would
be held liable in a civil action for negligence and includes
professionals of varied fields who possess special skill in that
profession generally.
(vii) The legal professionals in United Kingdom can be sued for
negligence by a way of regular civil action, however they would
not be liable under the law dealing with consumer rights for
trade/commercial activities.
(viii) Allowing consumer protection law to apply to the Advocates
would open floodgates of unnecessary litigations and it would
not be in the larger public interest to do so. It would also lead
to multiple proceedings before multiple forums, reagitation of
issues decided by a judicial body including the Supreme Court
with potentially conflicting decisions.
(ix) The summary nature of proceeding under the consumer
protection law with its accent on inexpensive and speedy
remedy (though enacted with laudable objects for protection
of consumers against trade and commercial activities), can
become an easy tool for disgruntled litigants to knock at the
doors of the consumer forums against the advocates. It would
lead to speculative/vexatious claims, rather than seeking
relief in respect of bona fide grievances against professional
misconduct.
(x) The legal profession is recognized as sui generis and stands
out among other profession due to its distinctive nature, where
the lawyers often find themselves operating in an environment
where control is elusive. Unlike many other professions where
practitioners may have a higher degree of control over their
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 497

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

surroundings, the lawyers frequently navigate through complex
legal landscapes shaped by diverse factors.
(xi) One of the primary distinctions of legal profession is the in-
herent complexity of legal issues. Lawyers must grapple with
intricate statutes, case laws and regulatory frameworks, which
often lack definitive answers. Legal disputes frequently involve
multiple parties with conflicting interests, further complicating
the matters. Unlike some other professions where problems
may have more straightforward solutions, the lawyers often
face ambiguity and uncertainty in their work, making control
over outcomes elusive.
(xii) The adversarial dynamics have an element of unpredictability, as
outcomes depend not only on the lawyer’s skill and knowledge
but also on the strategies employed by opposing counsel and
the decisions of judges.
(xiii) Lawyers are bound by ethical and professional obligations that
constrain their autonomy and control over their work. Adherence
to the codes of conduct, client confidentiality, and obligations
to the court limit the freedom of lawyers to act solely in their
own interest or according to their preferences.
(xiv) Unlike any other profession, where professionals are in
control of their surrounding fully, legal profession is the sole
profession, where advocates have no control over their en-
vironment. The environment they work in is controlled by the
presiding Judge.
(xv) The Bar Council of India Rules prescribe at least four sets of
duty that a lawyer has to oblige, viz., Duty to the Court, Duty
to the Client, Duty to Opponent and Duty to Colleagues, in
no particular order. These duties are sometimes conflicting in
nature, however whenever a conflict arises, the duty to court
is considered to be paramount.
(xvi) Unlike the medical profession, where scientific standards exist
to decide the standard of care, there is no universal standard
of care or objective test that exists or can be prescribed as the
threshold in the case of legal profession to adjudicate upon the
question of abdication of duty to care.
498 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

(xvii) Distinguishing the decision of this Court in Indian Medical
Association vs. V.P. Shantha & Others1, it was sought to
be submitted that there is a fundamental difference between
the practice of law and the practice of medicine, as also the
difference in the nature of professional-client relationship.
The complexity of legal issues, and the diversity of legal
contexts also would take the legal services rendered by
the Advocates outside the purview of the services defined
under the CP Act.
6. The learned Senior Advocate Mr. V. Giri - Amicus Curiae, submitted
that the Advocates can be broadly classified into two categories
based on the terms of their engagement and the nature of work
being done by them for their clients – (1) Advocates engaged by
clients to conduct their cases and then represent them before any
court, tribunal or other forum, on the strength of a vakalatnama
and (2) Advocates engaged by clients to provide their professional
expertise for providing legal opinions, issuing legal notices, drafting
agreements, etc. He submitted that the first category of advocates
would not come within the purview of a service provider under the
CP Act, as in that case the advocate acts as a representative or
agent of the client. He further submitted that it is open to a party to
plead and appear in person in the court, however when he executes
a vakalatnama, he chooses to engage an Advocate as his agent,
and the acts and statements of the advocate, in the course of his
duties in the matter, are like the acts and statements of the principal
i.e., the client himself. Such relationship cannot be equated to that
of a “service provider” and a “consumer” as contemplated in the
CP Act. However, the Amicus Curiae Mr. Giri fairly submitted that
in the second category of Advocates i.e., the Advocates who are
engaged by the clients outside the precincts of the court and outside
the litigation process i.e., who are not engaged on the strength of a
vakalatnama but engaged to provide legal services outside the court
process, would come within the purview of a service provider, and
any deficiency or shortcoming in the professional services rendered
by such Advocates, completely outside the confines of the litigation
process, would be covered under the CP Act.

1 [1995] Supp. 5 SCR 110 : (1995) 6 SCC 651
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 499

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

ANALYSIS
7. Though the question posed before us is, whether a complaint
alleging “deficiency in service” against Advocates practising Legal
Profession, would be maintainable under the Consumer Protection
Act, having regard to the entire spectrum and scheme of the said
Act, following further questions stem from the said question, which
deserve consideration.
(i) Whether the Legislature ever intended to include the Professions
or services rendered by the Professionals within the purview
of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted in 2019?
(ii) Whether the Legal Profession is sui generis?
(iii) Whether a Service hired or availed of an Advocate could be
said to be the service under “a contract of personal service”
so as to exclude it from the definition of “Service” contained in
Section 2 (42) of the CP Act 2019?
8. For adverting to the first question, whether the Legislature ever
intended to include the Professions or the services rendered by the
Professionals within the purview of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted
in 2019, it would be germane to ascertain the legislative intention
and to look back to the history, object and purpose of enacting the
CP Act 1986. A three-Judge Bench in case of State of Karnataka
vs. Vishwabharathi House Building Coop. Society and Others2,
while dealing with the issue raised about the constitutional validity
of the CP Act 1986, had elaborately considered the history, objects
and purpose of enacting the said Act.
“5. Before adverting to the question as regard the
competence of Parliament to enact the said Act, we may
notice the history of legislation leading to enactment of
the said Act.
6. The Secretary General, United Nations submitted draft
guidelines for consumer protection to the Economic and
Social Council (UNESCO) in 1983. The General Assembly
of the United Nations upon extensive discussions and

2 [2003] 1 SCR 397 : (2003) 2 SCC 412
500 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

negotiations among governments on this scope and content
thereof adopted the guidelines which inter alia provide for
the following:
“Taking into account the interests and needs of consumers
in all countries, particularly those in developing countries,
recognizing that consumers often face imbalances in
economic terms, educational level, and bargaining power,
and bearing in mind that consumer should have the right
of access to non-hazardous products, as well as the
importance of promoting just, equitable and sustainable
economic and social development, these guidelines for
consumer protection have the following objectives:
(a) To assist countries in achieving or maintaining
adequate protection for their population as consumers.
(b) To facilitate production and distribution patterns
responsive to the needs and desires of consumers.
(c) To encourage high levels of ethical conduct for those
engaged in the production and distribution of goods
and services to consumers.
(d) To assist countries in curbing abusive business
practices by all enterprises at the national
and international levels which adversely affect
consumers.
(e) To facilitate the development of independent
consumer groups.
(f) To further international cooperation in the field of
consumer protection.
(g) To encourage the development of market conditions
which provide consumers with greater choice at
lower prices.”
7. The framework for the Consumer Act was provided by a
resolution dated 9-4-1985 of the General Assembly of the
United Nations Organisation. This is known as “Consumer
Protection Resolution No. 39/248”. India is a signatory to
the said Resolution.
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 501

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

8. The said Act was enacted having regard to the
aforementioned Resolution.
9. It seeks to provide for better protection of the interests
of consumers and for the said purpose, to make provision
for the establishment of Consumer Councils and other
authorities for the settlement of consumer disputes and
for matters connected therewith, as would appear from the
Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act.
10. It further seeks inter alia to promote and protect the
rights of consumers such as—
"(a) The right to be protected against marketing of goods
which are hazardous to life and property;
(b) the right to be informed about the quality, quantity,
potency, purity, standard and price of goods to protect
the consumer against unfair trade practices;
(c) the right to be assured, wherever possible, access
to variety of goods at competitive prices;
(d) the right to be heard and to be assured that
consumers’ interests will receive due consideration
at appropriate forums;
(e) the right to seek redressal against unfair trade practice
or unscrupulous exploitation of consumers; and
(f) right to consumer education.””
9. The scope and object of the said legislation had also come up for
consideration before this Court in Common Cause, A Registered
Society vs. Union of India and Others3 in which it was observed: -
“2. The object of the legislation, as the Preamble of the
Act proclaims, is “for better protection of the interests
of consumers”. During the last few years preceding the
enactment there was in this country a marked awareness
among the consumers of goods that they were not getting
their money’s worth and were being exploited by both

3 [1993] 1 SCR 10 : (1997) 10 SCC 729
502 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

traders and manufacturers of consumer goods. The need
for consumer redressal fora was, therefore, increasingly
felt. Understandably, therefore, legislation was introduced
and enacted with considerable enthusiasm and fanfare
as a path-breaking benevolent legislation intended to
protect the consumer from exploitation by unscrupulous
manufacturers and traders of consumer goods. A three-tier
fora comprising the District Forum, the State Commission
and the National Commission came to be envisaged under
the Act for redressal of grievances of consumers….”
10. In Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K. Gupta 4, it was
observed in paragraph 2 as under: -
“2. ……To begin with the preamble of the Act, which
can afford useful assistance to ascertain the legislative
intention, it was enacted, ‘to provide for the protection of
the interest of consumers. Use of the word ‘protection’
furnishes key to the minds of makers of the Act. Various
definitions and provisions which elaborately attempt to
achieve this objective have to be construed in this light
without departing from the settled view that a preamble
cannot control otherwise plain meaning of a provision. In
fact the law meets long felt necessity of protecting the
common man from such wrongs for which the remedy
under ordinary law for various reasons has become illusory.
Various legislations and regulations permitting the State
to intervene and protect interest of the consumers have
become a haven for unscrupulous ones as the enforcement
machinery either does not move or it moves ineffectively,
inefficiently and for reasons which are not necessary to be
stated. The importance of the Act lies in promoting welfare
of the society by enabling the consumer to participate
directly in the market economy. It attempts to remove
the helplessness of a consumer which he faces against
powerful business, described as, ‘a network of rackets’
or a society in which, ‘producers have secured power’
to ‘rob the rest’ and the might of public bodies which are

4 [1993] Supp. 3 SCR 615 : (1994) 1 SCC 243
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 503

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

degenerating into storehouses of inaction where papers
do not move from one desk to another as a matter of duty
and responsibility but for extraneous consideration leaving
the common man helpless, bewildered and shocked.…..”
11. Yet in Laxmi Engineering Works vs. P.S.G. Industrial Institute5,
it was held in paragraph 10 as under: -
“10. A review of the provisions of the Act discloses that the
quasi-judicial bodies/authorities/agencies created by the
Act known as District Forums, State Commissions and the
National Commission are not courts though invested with
some of the powers of a civil court. They are quasi-judicial
tribunals brought into existence to render inexpensive and
speedy remedies to consumers. It is equally clear that
these forums/commissions were not supposed to supplant
but supplement the existing judicial system. The idea was
to provide an additional forum providing inexpensive and
speedy resolution of disputes arising between consumers
and suppliers of goods and services. The forum so
created is uninhibited by the requirement of court fee
or the formal procedures of a court. Any consumer can
go and file a complaint. Complaint need not necessarily
be filed by the complainant himself; any recognized
consumers’ association can espouse his cause. Where
a large number of consumers have a similar complaint,
one or more can file a complaint on behalf of all. Even
the Central Government and State Governments can act
on his/their behalf. The idea was to help the consumers
get justice and fair treatment in the matter of goods and
services purchased and availed by them in a market
dominated by large trading and manufacturing bodies.
Indeed, the entire Act revolves round the consumer and
is designed to protect his interest. The Act provides for
“business-to-consumer” disputes and not for “business-to-
business” disputes. This scheme of the Act, in our opinion,
is relevant to and helps in interpreting the words that fall
for consideration in this appeal.”

5 [1995] 3 SCR 174 : (1995) 3 SCC 583
504 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

12. Thus, considering the intention of the Legislature, the objects and
reasons of the Act of 1986 it was repeatedly held that the said Act
was enacted to provide for the better protection of the interests
of the consumers against their exploitation by the traders and
manufacturers of the consumer goods, and to help consumers in
getting justice and fair treatment in the matter of goods and services
purchased and availed by them in a market dominated by large
trading and manufacturing bodies.
13. After several years of passing of the CP Act 1986, still many
shortcomings in the said Act were noticed while administering various
provisions of the said Act. Hence, the CP Act 1986 was repealed and
the CP Act, 2019 came to be re-enacted. The statement of objects
and reasons for re-enacting the said Act of 2019 reads as under:-
“1. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986) was
enacted to provide for better protection of the interests of
consumers and for the purpose of making provision for
establishment of consumer protection councils and other
authorities for the settlement of consumer disputes, etc.
Although, the working of the consumer dispute redressal
agencies has served the purpose to a considerable extent
under the said Act, the disposal of cases has not been
fast due to various constraints. Several shortcomings have
been noticed while administering the various provisions
of the said Act.
2. Consumer markets for goods and services have
undergone drastic transformation since the enactment of
the Consumer Protection Act in 1986. The modern market
place contains a plethora of products and services. The
emergence of global supply chains, rise in international
trade and the rapid development of e-commerce have led
to new delivery systems for goods and services and have
provided new options and opportunities for consumers.
Equally, this has rendered the consumer vulnerable
to new forms of unfair trade and unethical business
practices. Misleading advertisements, tele- marketing,
multi-level marketing, direct selling and e-commerce pose
new challenges to consumer protection and will require
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 505

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

appropriate and swift executive interventions to prevent
consumer detriment. Therefore, it has become inevitable
to amend the Act to address the myriad and constantly
emerging vulnerabilities of the consumers. In view of this,
it is proposed to repeal and re-enact the Act.”
14. It is trite to say that a reference to statement of objects and reasons
is permissible for understanding the background, the antecedent
state of affairs, the surrounding circumstances in relation to the
statute, and the evil which the statute had sought to remedy.* As
discernible from the statement of objects and reasons for re-enacting
the CP Act, 2019, there were certain shortcomings found in the CP
Act 1986 while administering the said Act, and at the same time,
due to the emergence of global supply chains, rise in international
trade and rapid development of e-commerce leading to new systems
for goods and services, new options and opportunities had become
available to the consumers. However, new forms of unfair trade
and unethical business practices also came to be developed, which
made the consumers more vulnerable. Misleading advertisements,
telemarketing, multi-level marketing, e-commerce posed new
challenges, which necessitated the Legislature to re-enact the Act.
15. There was not a whisper in the statement of objects and reasons
either of the CP Act, 1986 or 2019 to include the Professions or the
Services provided by the Professionals like Advocates, Doctors etc.
within the purview of the Act. It is very well accepted proposition
of the fact that Professionals could not be called Businessmen
or Traders, nor Clients or Patients be called Consumers. It is
also required to be borne in mind that the terms ‘business’ or
‘trade’ having a commercial aspect involved, could not be used
interchangeably with the term ‘Profession’ which normally would
involve some branch of learning or science. Profession as such
would require knowledge of an advanced type in a given field of
learning or science, or learning gained by a prolonged course
of specialized study. As per Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition,
“Profession” means “a vocation requiring advanced education and
training; especially one of the three traditional Professions- Law,
Medicine and the Ministry.” “Professional” means “someone who

* State of West Bengal vs. Subodh Gopal Bose & Others, AIR 1954 SC 92
506 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

belongs to a learned profession or whose occupation requires a
high level of training and proficiency.”
16. According to Rupert M. Jackson and John L. Powell,* the Occupations
which are regarded as Professions have four characteristics, viz.,
(i) the nature of the work which is skilled and specialized and a
substantial part is mental rather than manual;
(ii) commitment to moral principles which go beyond the general
duty of honesty and a wider duty to community which may
transcend the duty to a particular client or patient;
(iii) professional association which regulates admission and seeks
to uphold the standards of the profession through professional
codes on matters of conduct and ethics; and
(iv) high status in the community.
17. As observed in Indian Medical Association (supra) :-
“22. In the matter of professional liability professions differ
from other occupations for the reason that professions
operate in spheres where success cannot be achieved
in every case and very often success or failure depends
upon factors beyond the professional man’s control. In
devising a rational approach to professional liability which
must provide proper protection to the consumer while
allowing for the factors mentioned above, the approach
of the courts is to require that professional men should
possess a certain minimum degree of competence and
that they should exercise reasonable care in the discharge
of their duties. In general, a professional man owes to
his client a duty in tort as well as in contract to exercise
reasonable care in giving advice or performing services.”
18. In view of the above, a “Profession” would require advanced education
and training in some branch of learning or science. The nature of
work is also skilled and specialised one, substantial part of which
would be mental rather than manual. Therefore, having regard to
the nature of work of a professional, which requires high level of
education, training and proficiency and which involves skilled and
* “Jackson and Powell on Professional Liability” 2nd supplement to the 7th edition
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 507

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

specialized kind of mental work, operating in the specialized spheres,
where achieving success would depend upon many other factors
beyond a man’s control, a Professional cannot be treated equally
or at par with a Businessman or a Trader or a Service provider of
products or goods as contemplated in the CP Act. Similarly, the
services rendered by a Businessman or a Trader to the consumers
with regard to his goods or products cannot be equated with the
Services provided by a Professional to his clients with regard to
his specialized branch of profession. The legislative draftsmen are
presumed to know the law and there is no good reason to assume
that the legislature intended to include the Professions or the
Professionals or the services provided by the professionals within
the ambit of the CP Act. Any interpretation of the Preamble or the
scheme of the Act for construing ‘Profession’ as ‘Business’ or ‘Trade’;
or ‘Professional’ as ‘service provider’ would be extending the scope
of the Act which was not intended, rather would have a counter
productive effect. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the
very purpose and object of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted in 2019
was to provide protection to the consumers from the unfair trade
practices and unethical business practices only. There is nothing
on record to suggest that the Legislature ever intended to include
the Professions or the Professionals within the purview of the Act.
19. One should also not lose sight of the fact that the other object of the
Act was to provide to the consumers timely and effective administration
and settlement of their disputes. If the services provided by all
the Professionals are also brought within the purview of the Act,
there would be flood-gate of litigations in the commissions/forums
established under the Act, particularly because the remedy provided
under the Act is inexpensive and summary in nature. Consequently,
the very object of providing timely and effective settlement of
consumers’ disputes arising out of the unfair trade and unethical
business practices would be frustrated.
20. We may clarify at this juncture that we do not propose to say that
the professionals could not be sued or held liable for their alleged
misconduct or tortious or criminal acts. In the process of overall
depletion and erosion of ethical values and degradation of the
professional ethics, the instances of professional misconduct are
also on the rise. Undoubtedly, no professional either legal, medical
508 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

or any other professional enjoys any immunity from being sued or
from being held liable for his professional or otherwise misconduct
or other misdeeds causing legal, monetary or other injuries to his
clients or the persons hiring or availing his services. The fact that
professionals are governed by their respective Councils like Bar
Councils or Medical Councils also would not absolve them from their
civil or criminal liability arising out of their professional misconduct
or negligence. Nonetheless, as discussed hereinabove, we are of
the opinion that neither the Professions nor the Professionals were
ever intended to be brought within the purview of the CP Act either
of 1986 or 2019.
21. Of course, we are conscious of the decision in Indian Medical
Association vs. V.P. Shantha & Others (supra), in which a three-
Judge Bench of this Court has held inter alia that the wide amplitude
of the definition of ‘service’ in the main part of Section 2(1)(o) would
cover the services rendered by Medical Practitioners within the said
Section 2(1)(o). However, in our humble opinion, the said decision
deserves to be revisited having regard to the history, object, purpose
and the scheme of the CP Act and in view of the opinion expressed
by us hereinabove to the effect 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 .
22. At this juncture, we may rely upon Order VI Rule 2 of the Supreme
Court Rules which reads as under: -
“ORDER VI, Rule 2.-
Where in the course of the hearing of any cause, appeal
or other proceeding, the Bench considers that the matter
should be dealt with by a larger Bench, it shall refer the
matter to the Chief Justice, who shall thereupon constitute
such a Bench for the hearing of it.”
23. The said Rule has been interpreted in Triveniben vs. State of
Gujarat6, in which it has been observed that: -

6 [1989] 1 SCR 509 : (1989) 1 SCC 678
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 509

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

“35. This is undoubtedly a salutary rule, but it appears to
have only a limited operation. It apparently governs the
procedure of a smaller Bench when it disagrees with the
decision of a larger Bench. If the Bench in the course of
hearing of any matter considers that the matter should be
dealt with by a larger Bench, it shall refer the matter to
the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice shall then constitute
a larger Bench for disposal of the matter. This exercise
seems to be unnecessary when a larger Bench considers
that a decision of a smaller Bench is incorrect unless a
constitutional question arises”.
24. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the decision of the
three-judge bench, in case of Indian Medical Association vs. V.P.
Shantha (supra) deserves to be revisited and considered by a larger
bench. We, therefore refer the matter to Hon’ble the Chief Justice
of India for His Lordship’s consideration.
25. This takes us to the next question. Even if, it is held that the CP Act
applies to the “Professions” and the “Professionals,” the next question
that falls for our consideration is whether the Legal Profession is sui
generis or is different from the other Profession, particularly from the
Medical Profession because the NCDRC in the impugned order has
relied upon the decision in case of Indian Medical Association vs.
V.P. Shantha (supra) for bringing the Advocates within the purview
of the CP Act.
26. As observed in Byram Pestonji Gariwala vs. Union Bank of India
and Others7, the Indian legal system is the product of history. It is
rooted in our soil; nurtured and nourished by our culture, languages
and traditions; fostered and sharpened by our genius and quest for
social justice; reinforced by history and heritage. After the attainment
of independence and the adoption of the Constitution of India,
judicial administration and the constitution of the law courts remained
fundamentally unchanged. The concept, structure and organisation of
courts, the substantive and procedural laws, the adversarial system
of trial and other proceedings and the function of judges and lawyers
remained basically unaltered and rooted in the common law traditions

7 [1991] Supp. 1 SCR 187 : (1992) 1 SCC 31
510 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

in contradistinction to those prevailing in the civil law or other systems
of law. Resultantly, the role, status and capacity of an advocate to
represent his client has also remained by and large unaltered.
27. This Court in R. Muthukrishnan vs. Registrar General, High
Court of Judicature at Madras8, delineating the unique nature of
the legal profession and of the services rendered by the lawyers,
observed thus:
“16. The legal profession cannot be equated with any
other traditional professions. It is not commercial in nature
and is a noble one considering the nature of duties to be
performed and its impact on the society. The independence
of the Bar and autonomy of the Bar Council has been
ensured statutorily in order to preserve the very democracy
itself and to ensure that judiciary remains strong. Where
the Bar has not performed the duty independently and
has become a sycophant that ultimately results in the
denigrating of the judicial system and judiciary itself. There
cannot be existence of a strong judicial system without
an independent Bar.
17. It cannot be gainsaid that lawyers have contributed in
the struggle for independence of the nation. They have
helped in the framing of the Constitution of India and
have helped the courts in evolving jurisprudence by doing
hard labour and research work. The nobility of the legal
system is to be ensured at all costs so that the Constitution
remains vibrant and to expand its interpretation so as to
meet new challenges.
18. It is basically the lawyers who bring the cause to the
Court are supposed to protect the rights of individuals of
equality and freedom as constitutionally envisaged and
to ensure the country is governed by the rule of law.
Considering the significance of the Bar in maintaining the
rule of law, right to be treated equally and enforcement of
various other fundamental rights, and to ensure that various

8 [2019] 1 SCR 589 : (2019) 16 SCC 407
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 511

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

institutions work within their parameters, its independence
becomes imperative and cannot be compromised. The
lawyers are supposed to be fearless and independent
in the protection of rights of litigants. What lawyers are
supposed to protect, is the legal system and procedure
of law of deciding the cases.
19. Role of the Bar in the legal system is significant. The
Bar is supposed to be the spokesperson for the judiciary
as Judges do not speak. People listen to the great
lawyers and people are inspired by their thoughts. They
are remembered and quoted with reverence. It is the duty
of the Bar to protect honest Judges and not to ruin their
reputation and at the same time to ensure that corrupt
Judges are not spared. However, lawyers cannot go to
the streets or go on strike except when democracy itself
is in danger and the entire judicial system is at stake. In
order to improve the system, they have to take recourse
to the legally available methods by lodging complaint
against corrupt Judges to the appropriate administrative
authorities and not to level such allegation in the public.
Corruption is intolerable in the judiciary.
20. The Bar is an integral part of the judicial administration.
In order to ensure that judiciary remains an effective tool,
it is absolutely necessary that the Bar and the Bench
maintain dignity and decorum of each other. The mutual
reverence is absolutely necessary. The Judges are to be
respected by the Bar, they have in turn equally to respect
the Bar, observance of mutual dignity, decorum of both
is necessary and above all they have to maintain self-
respect too.
21. It is the joint responsibility of the Bar and the Bench
to ensure that equal justice is imparted to all and that
nobody is deprived of justice due to economic reasons or
social backwardness. The judgment rendered by a Judge
is based upon the dint of hard work and quality of the
arguments that are advanced before him by the lawyers.
There is no room for arrogance either for a lawyer or for
a Judge.
512 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

22. There is a fine balance between the Bar and the
Bench that has to be maintained as the independence of
the Judges and judiciary is supreme. The independence
of the Bar is on equal footing, it cannot be ignored and
compromised and if lawyers have the fear of the judiciary or
from elsewhere, that is not conducive to the effectiveness
of the judiciary itself, that would be self-destructive.”
28. In State of U.P and Others vs. U.P. State Law Officers Association
and Others9, it was observed thus: -
“14. Legal profession is essentially a service-oriented
profession. The ancestor of today›s lawyer was no more
than a spokesman who rendered his services to the needy
members of the society by articulating their case before
the authorities that be. The services were rendered without
regard to the remuneration received or to be received.
With the growth of litigation, lawyering became a full-time
occupation and most of the lawyers came to depend upon
it as the sole source of livelihood. The nature of the service
rendered by the lawyers was private till the Government
and the public bodies started engaging them to conduct
cases on their behalf.”
29. It is thus well recognized in catena of decisions that the legal
profession cannot be equated with any other traditional professions.
It is not commercial in nature but is essentially a service oriented,
noble profession. It cannot be gainsaid that the role of Advocates
is indispensable in the Justice Delivery System. An evolution of
jurisprudence to keep our Constitution vibrant is possible only with the
positive contribution of the Advocates. The Advocates are expected
to be fearless and independent for protecting the rights of citizens, for
upholding the Rule of law and also for protecting the Independence
of Judiciary. People repose immense faith in the Judiciary, and the
Bar being an integral part of the Judicial System has been assigned
a very crucial role for preserving the independence of the Judiciary,
and in turn the very democratic set up of the Nation. The Advocates

9 [1994] 1 SCR 348 : (1994) 2 SCC 204
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 513

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

are perceived to be the intellectuals amongst the elites and social
activists amongst the downtrodden. That is the reason they are
expected to act according to the principles of uberrima fides i.e.,
the utmost good faith, integrity, fairness and loyalty while handling
the legal proceedings of his client. Being a responsible officer of the
court and an important adjunct of the administration of justice, an
Advocate owes his duty not only to his client but also to the court
as well as to the opposite side.
30. The legal profession is different from the other professions also for
the reason that what the Advocates do, affects not only an individual
but the entire administration of justice, which is the foundation of the
civilized society. It must be remembered that the legal profession is
a solemn and serious profession. It has always been held in very
high esteem because of the stellar role played by the stalwarts
in the profession to strengthen the judicial system in the country.
Their services in making the judicial system efficient, effective and
credible, and in creating a strong and impartial Judiciary, which is
one of the three pillars of the Democracy, could not be compared
with the services rendered by other professionals. Therefore,
having regard to the role, status and duties of the Advocates as
the professionals, we are of the opinion that the legal profession is
sui generis i.e unique in nature and cannot be compared with any
other profession.
31. The next question that falls for our consideration is whether a service
hired or availed of an Advocate could be said to be the service under
a “contract of personal service?”
32. At the outset, it may be stated that in the Indian Courts, various
sobriquets or epithets like pleaders, advocates, lawyers, vakils,
counsels, attorneys etc. are being used interchangeably to describe
the Legal Practitioners, may be because various Acts like Legal
Practitioners Act, 1879, Bombay Pleaders Act, 1920, Indian Bar
Councils Act, 1926 were in force during pre-independence era.
However, on the Advocates Act, 1961 having come into force, the
provisions of the said Acts stood repealed as per Section 50 of the
Advocates Act. The Advocates Act 1961 was enacted to amend and
consolidate the law relating to legal practitioners and to provide for
the constitution of Bar Councils and an All-India Bar.
514 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

33. The Advocates Act defines “Advocate” separately from “Legal
Practitioner” -
“2(1)(a) - “advocate” means an advocate entered in any
roll under the provision of this Act;”
Section 2(1)(i) defines “legal practitioner’ as under: -
“2(1)(i) - “Legal Practitioner” means an advocate or vakil
of any High Court, a pleader, mukhtar or revenue agent;”
34. Advocate is included in the definition of “Legal Practitioner” but legal
practitioner is not included in the definition of “Advocate.” Advocate
is one who has been entered in any roll under the provisions of the
Advocates Act. If we glean over the provisions of the Advocates
Act, 1961, it appears that the said Act was enacted to amend and
consolidate the law relating to legal practitioners and to provide for
the constitution of Bar Councils and an All-India Bar. As per Section
16 thereof, there are only two classes of Advocates, namely Senior
Advocates and other Advocates. As per Section 29, there is only
one class of persons entitled to practice the profession of law,
namely Advocates, and as per Section 30, every advocate whose
name is entered in the State roll is entitled as of right to practice in
all Courts including the Supreme Court and before any Tribunal or
any other authority or person before whom such advocate is by or
under any law for the time being in force entitled to practice. The
disciplinary powers for taking action against the Advocates and
impose punishment for their misconduct have been conferred upon
the State Bar Councils and Bar Council of India as the case may be
under the Chapter V of the Advocates Act. The Bar Council of India
Rules framed under the Advocates Act lay down the restrictions on the
Senior Advocates, and also lay down the standards of professional
conduct and etiquette, which include the duties of the advocate
to the Court, to the client, to the opponent and to the colleagues.
Thus, comprehensive provisions are contained in the Advocates
Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules framed thereunder,
to take care of the professional misconduct of the Advocates, and
prescribing the punishments if they are found guilty of professional
or other misconduct by the Disciplinary Committees of the State Bar
Council or the Bar Council of India as the case may be.
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 515

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

35. In the light of the above provisions of the Advocates Act, let us
consider some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act
1986/2019. The definition of “Service” contained in Section 2(1)(o)
of the CP Act 1986 and in Section 2(42) of the CP Act 2019 is the
same which reads as under: -
“Service means service of any description which is made
available to potential users and includes, but not limited
to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking,
financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of
electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding or lodging
or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement
or the purveying of news or other information, but does
not include the rendering of any service free of charge
or under a contract of personal service.”
36. There is slight difference in the definition of ‘Deficiency’ in Section
2(1)(g) of 1986 Act and Section 2(11) of 2019 Act. The same is
reproduced as under: -
Section 2(1)(g) of CP Act, 1986:-
“Section 2(1) (g) -”Deficiency” means any fault imperfection,
shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and
manner of performance which is required to be maintained
by or under any law for the time being in force or has been
undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of
a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.”
Section 2(11) of CP Act, 2019:-
Section 2(11) - “Deficiency “ means any fault, imperfection,
shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and
manner of performance which is required to be maintained
by or under any law for the time being in force or has been
undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance
of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service and
includes-
(i) any act of negligence or omission or commission
by such person which causes loss or injury to the
consumer; and
516 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

(ii) deliberate withholding of relevant information by such
person to the consumer”
37. As can be seen, the definition of ‘service’ is divided into three parts
– the first part is explanatory in nature and defines service to mean
service of any description which is made available to the potential
users; the second part is inclusionary part, which expressly includes
the provision of facilities in connection with the specific services;
and the third part is exclusionary part which excludes rendering of
any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service.
Therefore, let us consider whether the service rendered by the
Advocates practising Legal Profession could be said to be the Service
under “a contract of personal service,” so as to exclude it from the
definition of “Service” contemplated under the Act.
38. The question as to whether a given relationship should be classified
as a contract ‘for services’ as opposed to a contract ‘of service’
[i.e. contract ‘of personal service’] is a vexed question of law and
is incapable of being answered with exactitude without reference to
the underlying facts in any given case. This Court in Dharangadhra
Chemical Works Ltd. vs. State of Saurashtra and Others10,
recognized this position of law and held that “the correct method of
approach, therefore, would be to consider whether having regard
to the nature of the work there was due control and supervision by
the employer”. In the words of Fletcher Moulton, L.J. at P.549 in
Simmons v. Heath Laundry Company [(1924) 1 KB 762] which were
cited with approval in Dharangadhra Chemcial Works Ltd. (supra):
“In my opinion it is impossible to lay down any rule of law
distinguishing the one from the other. It is a question of
fact to be decided by all the circumstances of the case.
The greater the amount of direct control exercised over the
person rendering the services by the person contracting
for them the stronger the grounds for holding it to be a
contract of service, and similarly the greater the degree of
independence of such control the greater the probability
that the services rendered are of the nature of professional
services and that the contract is not one of service.”

10 [1957] 1 SCR 152 : AIR 1957 SC 264
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 517

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

39. What is sought to be opined in the above cases is that the greater
the amount of direct control exercised over the person rendering
the services by the person contracting for them, the stronger would
be the grounds for holding it to be a “contract of service.” Hence,
let us see whether in case of Advocate-Client relationship, the
client exercises direct control over the Advocate who is rendering
his legal professional services to him. At this stage, it would be
beneficial to refer to some of the important provisions of Code of
Civil Procedure, which pertain to the representation of party-litigant
through Advocates. Order III of CPC pertains to the Recognized
Agents and Pleaders. As per the definition of “Pleader” contained
in Section 2 (15) CPC, ‘Pleader means any person entitled to
appear and plead for another in Court and includes an Advocate,
a Vakil and an Attorney of a High Court. Rule1 of Order III states
that any appearance, application or act in or in any Court may
be made or done by the party in person, or by his recognized
agent or by a pleader appearing, applying or acting, as the case
may be on his behalf. Rule 4 of the said Order III states that no
pleader shall act for any person in any Court, unless he has been
appointed for the purpose by such person by document in writing
signed by such person or by his recognized agent or by some other
person duly authorized by or under a power of attorney to make
such appointment. It further provides that every such appointment
shall be filed in Court and shall for the purposes of sub-rule (1) be
deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the Court
by writing signed by the client or the pleader as the case may be
and filed in the Court, or until the client or the pleader dies, or until
all proceedings in the suit are ended so far as regards the client.
Such document regarding appointment of a pleader is known in
common parlance as “Vakalatnama”, the proforma of which has
been appended in Form No.19 of the ‘Appendix H’ to CPC. The
said form is reproduced here under: -
“No.19
VAKALATNAMA
In the Court ……..Suit/Miscellaneous case/ Civil Appeal/
Execution Case No……….. of 19…./20…,fixed for Plaintiff/
Appellant/ Applicant/ D.H……….. Defendant/ Respondent/
518 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

Opposite Party/ J.D. Vakalatnama of Plaintiff/ Appellant
Applicant/ D.H./ Defendant/ Respondent/ Opposite Party/
J.D.
In the case noted above Sri…………, each of Sarvasri……….
Advocate, is hereby appointed as counsel, to appeals,
plead and act on behalf of the undersigned, in any manner,
he thinks it proper, either himself or through any other
Advocate, and in particular to do the following, namely, -
To receive any process of Court (including any notice from
any appellate or revisional Court), to file any applications,
petitions or pleadings, to file, produce or receive back any
documents, to withdraw or compromise the proceedings,
to refer to any matter to arbitration, to deposit or withdraw
any moneys, to execute any decree or order, to certify
payment, and receive any money due under such decree
or order.
The undersigned should be bound by all whatsoever may
be done in the aforesaid case (including any appeal or
revision therefrom) for and on behalf of the undersigned
by any of the said counsel.
Signature……… Attesting Witness:
Name in full ………. Name in full………….
Date …………. Address……………
Date………….
Accepted/ Accepted on the strength of the signature of
the attesting witnesses.”
40. A conjoint reading of the provisions contained in Order III CPC and
Chapter IV of Advocates Act pertaining to right to practise, there
remains no shadow of doubt that an advocate whose name has
been entered in the State roll is entitled as of right to practise in all
Courts, however he can act for any person in any Court only when
he is appointed by such person by executing the document called
“Vakalatnama.” Such Advocate has certain authorities by virtue of
such “Vakalatnama” but at the same time has certain duties too,
i.e. the duties to the courts, to the client, to the opponent and to
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 519

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

the colleagues as enumerated in the Bar Council of India Rules. In
this regard, this Court in Himalayan Cooperative Group Housing
Society vs. Balwan Singh and Others11 has made very apt
observations, which are reproduced hereunder-
22. Apart from the above, in our view lawyers are perceived
to be their clientʼs agents. The law of agency may not
strictly apply to the client-lawyerʼs relationship as lawyers
or agents, lawyers have certain authority and certain
duties. Because lawyers are also fiduciaries, their duties
will sometimes be more demanding than those imposed
on other agents. The authority-agency status affords the
lawyers to act for the client on the subject-matter of the
retainer. One of the most basic principles of the lawyer-
client relationship is that lawyers owe fiduciary duties to
their clients. As part of those duties, lawyers assume all
the traditional duties that agents owe to their principals
and, thus, have to respect the clientʼs autonomy to make
decisions at a minimum, as to the objectives of the
representation. Thus, according to generally accepted
notions of professional responsibility, lawyers should follow
the clientʼs instructions rather than substitute their judgment
for that of the client. The law is now well settled that a lawyer
must be specifically authorised to settle and compromise
a claim, that merely on the basis of his employment he
has no implied or ostensible authority to bind his client
to a compromise/settlement. To put it alternatively that a
lawyer by virtue of retention, has the authority to choose
the means for achieving the client’s legal goal, while the
client has the right to decide on what the goal will be. If the
decision in question falls within those that clearly belong
to the client, the lawyer’s conduct in failing to consult the
client or in making the decision for the client, is more likely
to constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
23. The Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 (for short “the BCI
Rules”), in Part VI Chapter II provide for the “Standards

11 [2015] 4 SCR 616 : (2015) 7 SCC 373
520 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

of Professional Conduct and Etiquette” to be observed
by all the advocates under the Advocates Act, 1961 (for
short “the 1961 Act”). In the Preamble to Chapter II, the
BCI Rules provide as follows:
“An advocate shall, at all times, comport himself
in a manner befitting his status as an officer of
the Court, a privileged member of the community,
and a gentleman, bearing in mind that what may
be lawful and moral for a person who is not a
member of the Bar, or for a member of the Bar
in his non-professional capacity may still be
improper for an advocate. Without prejudice to
the generality of the foregoing obligation, an
advocate shall fearlessly uphold the interests of
his client and in his conduct conform to the rules
hereinafter mentioned both in letter and in spirit.
The rules hereinafter mentioned contain canons
of conduct and etiquette adopted as general
guides; yet the specific mention thereof shall
not be construed as a denial of the existence of
others equally imperative though not specifically
mentioned.”
24. The Preamble makes it imperative that an advocate
has to conduct himself and his duties in an extremely
responsible manner. They must bear in mind that what
may be appropriate and lawful for a person who is not a
member of the Bar, or for a member of the Bar in his non-
professional capacity, may be improper for an advocate
in his professional capacity.
25. Section II of the said Chapter II provides for duties
of an advocate towards his client. Rules 15 and 19 of
the BCI Rules, have relevance to the subject-matter and
therefore, they are extracted below:
“15. It shall be the duty of an advocate fearlessly
to uphold the interests of his client by all fair
and honourable means without regard to any
unpleasant consequences to himself or any
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 521

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

other. He shall defend a person accused of a
crime regardless of his personal opinion as to
the guilt of the accused, bearing in mind that
his loyalty is to the law which requires that no
man should be convicted without adequate
evidence.
*****
19. An advocate shall not act on the instructions
of any person other than his client or his
authorised agent.”
26. While Rule 15 mandates that the advocate must
uphold the interest of his clients by fair and honourable
means without regard to any unpleasant consequences
to himself or any other. Rule 19 prescribes that an
advocate shall only act on the instructions of his client
or his authorised agent”
41. When we examine the relationship between an Advocate and
his Client from this point of view, the following unique attributes
become clear:
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.
522 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

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.
Thus, a considerable amount of direct control is exercised by the
Client over the manner in which an Advocate renders his services
during the course of his employment. All of these attributes
strengthen our opinion that the services hired or availed of an
Advocate would be that of a contract ‘of personal service’ and would
therefore stand excluded from the definition of “service” contained
in the section 2(42) of the CP Act, 2019. As a necessary corollary,
a complaint alleging “deficiency in service” against Advocates
practising Legal Profession would not be maintainable under the
CP Act, 2019.
42. In that view of the matter, we summarize our conclusions as under-
(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.
43. The impugned judgment passed by the NCDRC is set aside. The
Appeals stand allowed accordingly.
44. Before parting, we appreciate and place on record the valuable
assistance and services rendered by the learned Senior Advocate
Mr. V. Giri appointed as an Amicus Curiae in these matters.
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 523

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

Pankaj Mithal, J.
1. The moot question which emanates from the proceedings at hand,
if put in a different way, is whether the legal services of the lawyer
availed of by the client would be covered under the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 (now Consumer Protection Act, 2019).
2. It is well recognized that the profession of law is a noble profession
having an element of duty towards the court. Lawyers perform
multi-faceted duties. They not only have a duty towards the client
or their opponents but they have a paramount duty to assist the
court as well. In a way, they are officers as well as ambassadors
of the court. Thus, in rendering such kind of a duty to enable
the courts to come to a just conclusion, it may be possible that
at times, the lawyers may earn displeasure of the client while
assisting the court.
3. The profession of law, as such, is regarded as sui generis i.e. which
is unique. It is distinct from all other professions and is one of its
own kind.
4. It is in the above context that we have to examine if the legislature
in enacting the Consumer Protection Act intended to include the
services rendered by professionals, particularly by lawyers to their
clients, within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act.
5. The laws intended to protect consumers, as opposed to traders are
comparatively of recent origin.
6. The General Assembly of United Nations upon extensive discussions
with Governments of various nations submitted draft guidelines for
consumer protection to the United Nations Economic and Social
Council (UNESCO) in the year 1983 inter alia providing for the
following:
a) To assist countries in achieving or maintaining adequate
protection for their population as consumers;
b) To facilitate production and distribution patterns responsive to
the needs and desires of the consumers;
c) To encourage high levels of ethical conduct for those engaged
in the production and distribution of goods and services to
consumers;
524 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

d) To assist countries in curbing abusive business practices by
all enterprises at the national and international levels which
adversely affect consumers;
e) To facilitate the development of independent consumer groups;
f) To further international cooperation in the field of consumer
protection;
g) To encourage the development of market conditions which
provide consumers with greater choice at lower prices;
7. A bare reading of the above guidelines reveals that the same have been
formulated taking into account the interests and needs of consumers
in various countries, particularly developing countries, in order to level
out economic imbalances between consumers and service providers.
8. The General Assembly of the United Nations Organization by Resolution
No. 39/248 dated 9.4.1985 provided a framework known as Consumer
Protection Resolution to which our country is also a signatory.
9. It is on the basis of the above Consumer Protection Resolution of the
UNO that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in India was enacted
with the objective to save the consumers from unfair conduct and
practices of traders.
10. In Om Prakash vs. Assistant Engineer, Haryana Agro Industries
Corporation Ltd. and Anr.1 a three Judge Bench vide paragraph
7 described the Objects and Reasons for the enactment of the
Consumer Protection Act as under:
“7. From the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the
Act, it appears that the purpose of the Act is to protect the
interest of the consumer and to provide ‘the right, to seek
redressal against unfair trade practices or unscrupulous
exploitation of consumers’…”
11. Recently, in Laureate Buildwell (P) Ltd. vs. Charanjeet Singh,2 a
three Judge Bench of this Court, highlighting the objectives of the
Consumer Protection Act held as follows:

1 [1994] 3 SCR 463 : (1994) 3 SCC 504
2 [2021] 6 SCR 673 : (2021) 20 SCC 401
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 525

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

“26. If one also considers the broad objective of the
Consumer Protection Act, which is to provide for better
protection of the interests of consumers and for that
purpose, provide for the establishment of Consumer
Councils and other authorities for the settlement of
consumer disputes and for matters connected therewith,
as evident from the Statement of Objects and Reasons of
the Act. The Statement further seeks inter alia to promote
and protect the rights of consumers such as—
“2. … (a) the right to be protected against marketing of
goods which are hazardous to life and property;
(b) the right to be informed about the quality, quantity,
potency, purity, standard and price of goods to protect the
consumer against unfair trade practices;
(c) the right to be assured, wherever possible, access to
variety of goods at competitive prices;
(d) the right to be heard and to be assured that consumers’
interests will receive due consideration at appropriate
forums;
(e) the right to seek redressal against unfair trade practices
or unscrupulous exploitation of consumers; and
(f) right to consumer education.”
12. The idea behind the Consumer Protection Act from 1986 till today
has been to help the consumers get justice and fair treatment in
matters of goods and services purchased and availed of by them
in a market dominated by large trading and manufacturing bodies.
The entire Act revolves around the consumer and is designed to
protect their interests.
13. Leaving aside India for the time being, if we consider the
international practice with regard to the inclusion of lawyer-client
relationships within the ambit of consumer protection laws, we
would notice that the practice of common law countries evidences
the exclusion of lawyers from the umbrella of consumer protection
laws. It must be kept in mind that the consumer protection laws
of almost all countries are based upon the same resolution of
526 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

the UNO which forms the foundation for framing the Consumer
Protection Act in India.
14. To illustrate, Consumer Protection Act, 1999 enacted by the Parliament
of Malaysia vide Section 2 (2)(e) specifically provides that the said act
shall not apply, inter alia, to services provided by professionals who
are regulated by any law. It may be worth noting that the services of
the professionals such as lawyers in Malaysia are governed by Legal
Profession Act, 1976. Therefore, by virtue of the above Section 2
(2) (e), the services provided by the professionals such as lawyers
stand excluded from the application of the Consumer Protection Act
of Malaysia.
15. This legislative intent of excluding regulated professions from the
ambit of Consumer Protection Law has been continuing for over
a considerable period of time now. Aspects of such exclusion find
mention in the DIRECTIVE 2011/83/EU OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL OF 25 OCTOBER 2011 on
consumer rights where it has been said that provisions of the said
directive should not apply to regulated professions.
16. At the heart of this legislative intent to exempt such ‘regulated
professions’ from the scope of consumer laws lies the fact that such
professions are sui generis and paramount as services of general
interest.
17. The recent DIRECTIVE (EU) 2018/958 OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 28 June 2018 bears a
befitting testimony to this continuing intent of lawmakers and the desire
to safeguard regulated professions from any outside interreference.
18. Similarly, Section 188 of the Consumer Protection Act (Québec)
provides that:
“For the purpose of this division, every person offering
or providing any of the services referred to in section
189 [covering contracts of service] is considered to be a
merchant, except: … (i) persons who are members of a
professional order governed by the Professional Code
(chapter C-26).”
(emphasis supplied)
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 527

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

19. In a similar vein, States in the USA also exempt legal professionals
from consumer laws.
20. Illustratively, the Code of Maryland, Title 13, dealing with minimum
standards of consumer protection in Maryland, in Subtitle 1 § 13-104
explicitly states that:
“this title does not apply to: (1) The professional services
of a certified public accountant, architect, clergyman,
professional engineer, lawyer….”
(emphasis supplied)
21. The Code of the District of Columbia, while highlighting the powers
of the consumer protection agency in Title 28 Chapter 39 § 28–3903
states in clause (c) that:
“(c) The Department may not: … (2) apply the provisions
of section §28-3905 [Consumer Protection Complaints]
to: … (C) professional services of clergymen, lawyers,
and Christian Science practitioners engaging in their
respective professional endeavors”;
(emphasis supplied)
22. The Australian High Court, the highest court of the land in Australia,
in D’Orta-Ekenaike vs. Victoria Legal Aid3 has emphatically echoed
the need for such exemption and its direct bearing on the justice
delivery system. The reasoning of its majority is instructive and
deserves to be quoted in full:
“84. To remove the advocate’s immunity would make a
significant inroad upon what we have earlier described
as a fundamental and pervading tenet of the judicial
system. That inroad should not be created. There
may be those who will seek to characterize the result at
which the Court arrives in this matter as a case of lawyers
looking after their own, whether because of personal
inclination and sympathy, or for other base motives. But
the legal principle which underpins the Court’s conclusion

3 (2005) 223 CLR 1
528 [2024] 6 S.C.R.

Digital Supreme Court Reports

is fundamental. Of course, there is always a risk that the
determination of a legal controversy is imperfect. And it
may be imperfect because of what a party’s advocate
does or does not do. The law aims at providing the best
and safest system of determination that is compatible
with human fallibility. But underpinning the system is the
need for certainty and finality of decision. The immunity
of advocates is a necessary consequence of that need”.
(emphasis supplied)
23. It would be trite to mention here that the legal profession is a
regulated profession in India. The Advocates Act, 1961 regulates the
conduct of lawyers in India and is a complete code in itself. Given
the regulation, India also needs to bring the working of its regulated
professions in alignment with international practices.
24. In the era of globalization, though I am conscious that a law has
to be applied in context with the prevailing situation of the country,
nonetheless, to have a uniform application of any law particularly
the one which has been framed on the basis of the common
resolution of the UNO, laws must have a uniform application in all
nations. It is, therefore, essential that the consumer protection laws
in all countries may somewhat have universal application and be
confined to ‘consumers’ only i.e. to the persons who buys any goods
for consideration or hires or avails of any service for consideration,
impliedly excluding the professional services especially that of a
lawyer whose profession is sui generis.
25. In doing so, in India also the services of professionals more particularly
that of lawyers have to be excluded from consumer protection law
in accordance with the intention expressed in enacting the same.
26. With the above additional reasoning supplementing the various
other grounds for excluding the services of the professionals from
the Consumer Protection Act, I am in agreement with the opinion
expressed by my esteemed sister and I am of the view that the
legislature in India as in some other countries, had not intended to
include the services rendered by the professionals especially the
lawyers to their client within the purview of Consumer Protection
Act, 1986 and re-enacted in 2019.
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 529

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v.
D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr.

27. Accordingly, the view taken by the NCDRC to the effect that in
respect of deficiency in service rendered by the lawyers, a complaint
in Consumer Protection Act, 1986 would be maintainable, is incorrect
and stands overruled.
28. The impugned order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission dated 06.08.2007 is hereby set aside.
29. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.

Result of the case: In the judgment of Bela M. Trivedi, J.:
Appeals allowed.

In the judgment of Pankaj Mithal, J.:
Appeals disposed of.

†
Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain