Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (3) TMI 1022

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... )Complainant s litigation in Small Causes Court : The complainant/respondent in this appeal is a tenant in respect of Room No. 262 situated at Ashirwad Building, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai of Smt. Anandibai Laxman Chandorkar (hereinafter referred to as landlady for brevity s sake). The complainant had filed a suit under Bombay Rent Control Act, in the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai being Suit No. RAD-5353/1985 against the landlady in respect of the said premises in which he took interim notice No. 7521/1985 praying for restoration of water connection to his room. The said application was granted by the learned Judge of the said Small Causes Court by order dated 18-3-1987 directing the landlady to restore water supply on or before 31-3-1987. Against the said order, however, the landlady filed revision before the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court which by its order dated 23-2-1996 rejected the said revision of the landlady and confirmed the judgment dated 18-3-1987. The time stipulated for the compliance of the said order by the landlady in restoring the water supply was extended till 31-3-1996 by the Appellate Bench. ( ii )In the meantime, the complainant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alf of the complainant. What transpired, according to the complainant, in the Court and account of which complainant gives in his complaint in paragraph 11 is reproduced : "Paragraph 11 : It is humbly submitted that the writ petition was decided by Justice S.H. Kapadia on 6th August, 1996. The landlady has agreed that if I apply for separate meter and water connection, she will not raise any objection. Accordingly the writ petition was disposed of. However, the respondent in this petition has not opened his mouth in the Court. Instead he has not pressed for contempt which I have vigorously pursued." ( d )The complainant makes grievance that his Advocate i.e., the appel-lant did not open his mouth and in particular did not press for contempt proceedings which he had adopted in the Court of Small Causes against the landlady. The said act or omission amounts to deficiency in service by the appellant, negligence and lack of ordi-nary professional skill expected of an Advocate and hence the complaint. 3. Case of the appellant : ( i )The appellant after service of the process in the complaint lodged by the complainant before the District Forum, Mumbai Suburban District put .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... niment to the Appeal Memo, such as, complaint, appellant s written say as also affidavits, etc. put in by the parties before the District FORA. We also examined the copies of proceedings before the High Court and Court of Small Causes, Bombay between complainant and his landlady, including orders passed by the High Court as also by Court of Small Causes, Bombay. 5. By and large, the learned Advocate for the appellant as also representative of the complainant made submissions, on the basis of their pleadings, briefly adverted to hereinabove. 6. As is apparent, the crucial and decisive point that centres around is as to whether the appellant is negligent and has committed gross professional misconduct in not representing the complainant s case before the High Court and Small Causes Court, Mumbai, as an Advocate and in any way acted detrimental to the interest of the complainant. It is to be seen whether there is sufficient evidence to establish professional negligence of the appellant Advocate and deficiency of service in the conduct of Court cases of the complainant as has been alleged. 7. Before we proceed to consider issue as raised in para 6 above, it is though approp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e extended to the Advocates whose services litigants engage for consideration. In the case in hand, complainant has engaged, as material shows, services of the appellant, for consideration in the conduct of his case before the High Court. Our attention is drawn to the decision of the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Complaint No. 101 of 1991, S. Mahendran v. Chirayinki C.P. Bhudrakumar 1992 (2) C.P.R. 667 decided on 30-9-1992, wherein Advocate was held negligent and was ordered to pay compensation to his client complainant, who had taken recourse to C.P. Act, 1986. It has persuasive value. 10. It is to be noted that in Indian Medical Association s case ( supra ), there was specific contention raised that in view of specific provisions contained in Medical Council Act, Medical Practitioners were subject to disciplinary control of Medical Council of India and/or State Medical Council. However, this plea was rejected by the Supreme Court positing that same is no solace to the person who has suffered due to their ( i.e., of Doctors) negligence and the right of such person to seek redress under C.P. Act is not affected. 11. It is further pertinent to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ional negligence in conduct of the Court matter, the question is as to whether in the matter in hand the complainant proved and established the fact of the appellant being so negligent in the conduct of this Court matter so as to justify grant of compensation and cost as awarded by the District Forum vide its impugned judgment in this appeal. 13. Before we consider the material on record of this case, it would be necessary to advert to the parameters under which the negligence of the professionals, like Advocate, is to be established. This would not detain us any longer. For, the Supreme Court in its decisions in the case of ( i ) Pandurang Dattatraya Khandekar v. Bar Council of Maharashtra , AIR 1984 SC 110; ( ii ) R.D. Bhatia v. Rajinder Kaur [1996] 6 SCC 627; ( iii ) V.K. Kumaravelu v. Bar Council of India AIR 1997 SC 1014; and ( iv ) Prahlad Saran Gupta v. Bar Council of India AIR 1997 SC 1338, in cases directly concerning professional misconduct and negligence of Advocates, in the cases which were under inquiries under section 35 of Advocates Act, 1961, have laid down the criteria for establishing the allegations of misconduct and negligence against the Ad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly obstructing the respondent herein will stand. Accordingly writ petition is disposed of." Therefore, if one reads the said order, the main relief claimed by the complainant of restoration of water connection in his room is considered and granted by the High Court taking precaution that his landlady gives her N.O.C. for the same. Further, there is no reference to the contempt proceedings. In view of this obvious position, it would be noticed that there is no substance and justification in the stand and stance of the complainant. 15. Apart therefrom, it would be worth noticing how the appellant in his written say before the District Forum has recounted as to what transpired and how the Hon ble High Court passed the said order. Curiously, we do not find even a whisper of such relevant and material fact in the impugned order of the Forum, which has completely overlooked and/or ignored the same. In para 13 of his written statement, filed in August, 1997, this is how the appellant recounts the happenings : "I say that the above writ petition came for admission before His Lordship Justice Shri S.H. Kapadia on 6th August, 1996. I say that after hearing the arguments advanced by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ish to pursue the contempt application pending in the Small Causes Court at Mumbai, I made a statement to the Hon ble High Court that I did not wish to press the contempt application and the same was recorded by the Hon ble High Court." 16. It is most significant to note the complainant has not at all dealt with the said statements of the appellant reproduced hereinabove either before the District Forum or before us. For that matter, he has not denied or controverted the same. Not a word is stated about it. It is somewhat baffling and perplexing that even District Forum, for the reasons which are unfathomable, has failed to consider it. In fact, it has completely overlooked and ignored it. The said explanation of the appellant goes to the root of the matter. It is indeed curious and also shocking and disturbing that the District Forum proceeded in perfunctory and casual manner, without carefully considering and appreciating the material facts which are glaring and clinching the issues and which strongly militate against the merits of the grievances of the complainant against the appellant. 17. We are constrained to say something over the manner in which the District Forum h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion of a dispute is entitled to know atleast the official designation of the person who has considered the matter, what was considered by him, and the reasons for recording a decision against him. To enable the High Court or this Court to exercise its constitutional powers, not only the decision, but an adequate disclosure of materials justifying an inference that there has been a judicial consideration of the dispute by an authority competent in that behalf in the light of the claim made by the aggrieved party, is necessary. If the officer acting on behalf of the Government chooses to give no reasons, the right of appeal will be devoid of any substance. It is now settled law that where an authority makes an order in exercise of a quasi-judicial function, it must record its reasons in support of the order it makes. Every quasi-judicial order must be supported by reasons. The rule requiring reasons to be given in support of an order is, like the principle of audi alteram partem a basic principle of natural justice which must inform every quasi-judicial process and this rule must be observed in its proper spirit and mere pretence of compliance with it would not satisfy the require .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates