Court Upholds Dismissal of Complaint Against Advocate, Reinforcing Legal Profession's Unique Status
In a significant judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed the exclusion of legal services rendered by advocates from the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and its subsequent 2019 revision. The court, consisting of Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and Subhendu Samanta, delivered its verdict on June 24, 2026, dismissing a writ petition filed by A.S.S.K. Durga Prasad against the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and others.
The petitioner, Durga Prasad, had initially filed a complaint with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Visakhapatnam, alleging a deficiency in service by an advocate. This complaint was subsequently dismissed on merits in March 2022. Durga Prasad's appeals to the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and later to the NCDRC were also dismissed, prompting the filing of the current writ petition.
The High Court's judgment aligned with the Supreme Court's stance, as highlighted in the case of "Bar of Indian Lawyers v. D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases (2024) 8 SCC 430". The ruling clarified that services provided by advocates fall under "contracts of personal service" and are thus excluded from being defined as "service" under Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Consequently, any complaint alleging deficiency in legal services is not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Acts of 1986 or 2019.
The court emphasized that the legal profession is "sui generis" or unique in nature, and the legislature did not intend to include it within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act. This decision overturned a previous view by the NCDRC, which had erroneously deemed complaints against advocates maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act.
In the order, the High Court stated, "We are of the view that the complaint filed by the writ petitioner against the lawyer/advocate under the Consumer Protection Act was not maintainable. The same has rightly been dismissed. No interference is required with all the three orders impugned in the writ petition."
The ruling reinforces the special status of the legal profession in India and clarifies the boundaries of the Consumer Protection Act concerning professional services, providing clarity and protection for advocates practicing in the country.
Bottom line:-
Legal services rendered by advocates are excluded from the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and 2019. Complaints alleging deficiency in service against advocates practicing legal profession are not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act.
Statutory provision(s): Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
