Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Delhi High Court observed the possibility of professional misconduct on the part of lawyers in the absence of no rules to regulate their professional fees. Since the BCI has not laid any specific guideline in this regard, the Court directed the BCI to consider framing such rules or guidelines necessary to regulate the professional fee of lawyers. Justice Prathiba M Singh said that the practice of accepting blank cheques as security for the payment of a fee by the lawyers from their clients and presenting such cheques without the permission of such clients amounts to professional misconduct.
The Court had to deal with a case on an application filed by a plaintiff stating that she had given a blank cheque to her Advocate P K Chauhan, but later withdrew his services and requested him to not appear for any of the hearings concerning the legal dispute. Subsequently, she submitted the various blank cheques provided to him as security for his professional fees. There were three criminal complaints in total—first being the complaint filed by the former counsel against his client and her new counsel, and second, being the complaint filed by the client with the police against her counsel.
The Court disapproved the conduct of the former counsel by asserting the fact that the client had given blank cheques to her former counsel, as security for his professional fees. This would contribute to the committal of professional misconduct by the lawyers in the event of having not a single rule or guideline respecting the collection or recovery of professional fees by lawyers. Lawyers cannot hold the absence of guidelines or rules as justification to accept blank cheques as security for their professional fees. Filing of a criminal complaint on non-recovery of fees is the last resort to a lawyer against his client.
Subsequently, the counsel rendered an unconditional apology, and the court did not intend to take any action against him. Upon withdrawal of all complaints by the learned counsel, the court said that there was a lacuna in the Bar Council Rules which might result in harassment and frustration to litigants. Therefore, it was imperative to set up a grievance cell for the litigants, and frame guidelines regulating the charging of professional fees by lawyers. The Court directed the BCI to address the following issues:
In addition to the above, the court said the BCI to consider setting up an external mechanism by appointing an ombudsman along with prescribed timelines for addressing the grievances of the clients, who may face issues arising due to the matters concerning the professional fees of their lawyers.
86540
103860
630
114
59824