DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY
SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE:

LIABILITY OF ADVOCATES UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

SUBJECT:

LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

NAME OF THE FACULTY:

Dr. Vijayalakshmi

Name of the Candidate: N. Yaswanth Ram Reddy

Roll No: 18LLB055

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION
2. LIABILITY OF ADVOCATES UNDER CPA ACT
3. PROTECTION OF CONSUMERS UNDER CPA
4. CASE LAWS
5. CONCLUSION
 1. INTRODUCTION

Consumer Protection Act:

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA) is a law enacted by the Parliament of India to
protect the interests of consumers by establishing authorities for timely and effective
administration and settlement of consumer disputes. The Act replaced the old Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 and came into force on July 20, 2020.

The CPA aims to promote and protect the rights of consumers by regulating unfair trade
practices, misleading advertisements, and providing a mechanism for redressal of consumer
complaints. The Act also provides for the establishment of a Central Consumer Protection
Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect, and enforce the rights of consumers.

Under the CPA, consumers have the right to file complaints against sellers, manufacturers,
service providers, and other parties involved in the supply of goods or services. The Act
provides for a three-tier redressal mechanism for consumer complaints, including a district
consumer forum, a state consumer commission, and the National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission (NCDRC).1

The CPA has also introduced several new provisions to protect the interests of consumers,
such as the concept of product liability, which holds manufacturers and sellers liable for any
harm caused by defective products. The Act also provides for stringent penalties for those
found guilty of unfair trade practices, false or misleading advertisements, and other
violations.

In summary, the CPA is a comprehensive legislation aimed at protecting the rights of

consumers and promoting fair trade practices in India. It provides for a robust mechanism for
redressal of consumer complaints and ensures that sellers, manufacturers, and service
providers are held accountable for any deficiency in the goods or services provided to
consumers.2

Definition of Advocates under CPA Act:

1
https://www.vmslaw.edu.in/legal-practitioners-liability-for-deficiency-in-service-under-the-consumer-
protection-act-1986-an-analytical-review/
2
Ibid
Under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, "advocate" has been defined as a person who is
enrolled or entitled to be enrolled, as an advocate under the Advocates Act, 1961, and
includes any person who is appointed by or on behalf of another person to act as an advocate.

In simple terms, an advocate is someone who is authorized to represent or act on behalf of

someone else in legal matters. This definition includes not only those who are registered as

advocates under the Advocates Act, 1961 but also those who are appointed by someone else
to act as an advocate.

Therefore, any person who provides legal services as an advocate, whether registered or not,
falls under the definition of "advocate" under the CPA. This includes lawyers, legal advisors,
and any other person who provides legal advice or representation to clients.

It is important to note that the definition of "advocate" under the CPA is not limited to
lawyers or legal professionals who represent clients in court. It also includes those who
provide legal services in non-litigation matters, such as drafting legal documents or giving
legal advice.

The inclusion of advocates under the definition of "service provider" under the CPA means
that they are subject to the provisions of the Act, and consumers can file complaints against
them for any deficiency in service provided.
 2. LIABILITY OF ADVOCATES UNDER CPA ACT

Advocates are considered as service providers under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
(CPA) and are liable to be held accountable for any deficiency in service. Therefore,
advocates can be held liable under the CPA for any unfair trade practice, defective service or
advice, negligence, or any other act of omission or commission.

The CPA provides protection to consumers against any defects in goods or services provided
by a service provider, including advocates. If a consumer has suffered any loss or damage
due to the negligent or deficient service provided by an advocate, the consumer can file a
complaint under the CPA.

The liability of advocates under the CPA would depend on the facts and circumstances of
each case. However, in general, if an advocate has not provided the services with reasonable
care and skill, has given wrong or misleading advice, or has not followed the instructions of
the client, then the advocate may be held liable under the CPA.

It is important to note that the CPA does not restrict the rights of consumers to seek remedy
under any other law. Therefore, a consumer can also file a complaint against an advocate
under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, or the Indian Penal Code, 1860, if the facts of the case
warrant it.3

In summary, advocates are liable to be held accountable under the CPA if they provide
deficient or defective services, and consumers can file complaints under the CPA against
advocates for any such acts.

“Service provider” under CPA Act:

Under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a "service provider" is defined as any person who
provides service of any description, including banking, financing, insurance, transport,

3
http://www.penacclaims.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Parvathi-Warrier.pdf
processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging, entertainment, or any other
service that is prescribed by the government.4

Service providers are subject to liability under the CPA for any deficiency in the services
they provide. Deficiency in service is defined as any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or
inadequacy in the quality, nature, or manner of performance of the services provided.

In addition to liability for deficient services, service providers can also be held liable for
unfair trade practices, false or misleading advertisements, and other violations of consumer
rights. The CPA provides for strict penalties for such violations, including fines,
imprisonment, and cancellation of license.

Consumers have the right to file complaints against service providers for any deficiency in
the services provided, and seek compensation for any harm caused as a result. The Act
provides for a three-tier redressal mechanism for consumer complaints, including a district
consumer forum, a state consumer commission, and the National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission (NCDRC).5

In summary, service providers are held accountable under the Consumer Protection Act for
any deficiency in the services they provide, as well as for unfair trade practices, false or
misleading advertisements, and other violations of consumer rights. The Act provides for a
mechanism to protect the interests of consumers and ensure that service providers are held
liable for any harm caused to consumers.

Grounds for liability:

Under the Consumer Protection Act, advocates are considered service providers and can be
held liable for any deficiency in the services they provide to their clients. Deficiency in
services refers to any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature,
or manner of performance of the services provided.

Advocates can be held liable for deficiency in services in various circumstances, such as
when they fail to exercise reasonable care, skill, or diligence in providing legal advice, when
they breach their professional duty of care, or when they fail to act in the best interests of
their clients. In addition, advocates can be held liable for any loss or damage suffered by their
clients as a result of their actions or omissions.6
4
Ibid
5
Ibid
6
https://blog.ipleaders.in/consumer-protection-act-2019-and-the-legal-profession/
The liability of advocates under the CPA also extends to unfair trade practices, false or
misleading advertisements, and other violations of consumer rights. Advocates can be held
liable for such violations if they engage in any act or practice that is misleading or deceptive,
or if they provide false or misleading information to their clients.

Consumers have the right to file complaints against advocates for any deficiency in the
services provided and seek compensation for any harm caused as a result. The Act provides
for a three-tier redressal mechanism for consumer complaints, including a district consumer
forum, a state consumer commission, and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission (NCDRC).7

In summary, advocates can be held liable under the Consumer Protection Act for any
deficiency in the legal services they provide, as well as for unfair trade practices, false or
misleading advertisements, and other violations of consumer rights. The Act provides for a
mechanism to protect the interests of consumers and ensure that advocates are held
accountable for any harm caused to their clients

7
https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/blog/why-do-lawyers-enjoy-immunity-against-wrong-practices/
 3. PROTECTION OF CONSUMERS UNDER CPA ACT

The Consumer Protection Act (CPA), 2019 provides for the protection of consumers against
deficient legal services provided by advocates. The Act recognizes that advocates are service
providers and consumers have the right to receive services of a certain standard.

Section 2(42) of the CPA defines a "service" as "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, lodging, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news
or other information."

Advocates fall under this definition and are considered service providers under the CPA.
Section 2(6) of the Act defines a "consumer" as any person who buys or avails of any service
for consideration, and includes any user of such service.8

Consumers of legal services provided by advocates are protected under the CPA against
deficient services. Section 2(17) of the Act defines "deficiency" as any fault, imperfection,
shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature, or manner of performance that 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 25 of the CPA provides for the liability of advocates for deficient services. It states
that if a service provided by an advocate is deficient, the consumer may file a complaint with
the appropriate consumer forum seeking relief. The consumer may seek a refund of the fees
paid, compensation for any loss or damage suffered, or any other appropriate relief.

In addition to deficient services, the CPA also provides for the protection of consumers
against unfair trade practices, false or misleading advertisements, and other violations of
consumer rights. Advocates can be held liable for such violations if they engage in any act or
practice that is misleading or deceptive, or if they provide false or misleading information to
their clients.

Consumers of legal services provided by advocates are also entitled to the same rights as
other consumers under the CPA, such as the right to information, the right to be protected
against hazardous goods or services, the right to choose, and the right to be heard.

8
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1574747_code1402919.pdf?abstractid=1574747&mirid=1
In summary, consumers of legal services provided by advocates are protected under the
Consumer Protection Act against deficient services, unfair trade practices, false or misleading
advertisements, and other violations of consumer rights. The Act provides for a mechanism to
protect the interests of consumers and ensure that advocates are held accountable for any
harm caused to their clients.

Right to file complaint against advocates under CPA:

The relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) related to the protection of
consumers against deficient legal services provided by advocates are as follows:

Definition of "Service Provider" - Section 2(42) of the CPA defines a "service" as any service
of any description which is made available to potential users and includes the provision of
facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of
electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding, lodging, entertainment, amusement, or the
purveying of news or other information. Advocates fall under this definition and are
considered service providers.9

Definition of "Deficiency" - Section 2(17) of the CPA defines "deficiency" as any fault,
imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature, or manner of performance
that 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.

Right to File Complaints - Section 2(1)(c) of the CPA provides that a "consumer" means any
person who hires or avails of any services for a consideration. If a consumer believes that the
legal services provided by an advocate are deficient, they can file a complaint with the
appropriate consumer forum seeking relief.

Three-tier Redressal Mechanism - The CPA provides for a three-tier redressal mechanism for
consumer complaints, including a district consumer forum, a state consumer commission, and
the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).10

Power of Consumer Forums - The consumer forum has the power to issue orders for the
refund of fees paid, compensation for any loss or damage suffered, or any other appropriate

9
Ibid
10
https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/lawyer-s-liability-under-consumer-protection-act-237.asp
relief. The forum can also direct the advocate to rectify the deficiency in the services
provided.

Unfair Trade Practices - Section 2(1)(r) of the CPA defines "unfair trade practices" to include
any deceptive or misleading representation, false or misleading advertisement, and any other
similar practices that may be determined by the appropriate authorities. Advocates can be
held liable for unfair trade practices and consumers can file complaints against them for such
violations.

In summary, the CPA provides for the protection of consumers against deficient legal
services provided by advocates. Consumers have the right to file complaints against
advocates and seek redressal through the three-tier redressal mechanism provided under the
Act. The consumer forums have the power to issue orders for compensation and other
appropriate relief and can also direct the advocate to rectify the deficiency in the services
provided. The Act also protects consumers against unfair trade practices and advocates can be
held liable for such violations.
 4. CASE LAWS

1. Nishant Mishra vs Anandendra Mishra, Revision Petition No. 3082 of 2013

(National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission):

Facts:

The petitioner, Nishant Mishra, engaged the services of M/s. Arunendra Mishra and
Associates, a law firm, for handling a legal matter related to his ancestral property.

The law firm charged a fee of Rs. 1,50,000 for the services rendered.

The petitioner alleged that the law firm did not provide proper legal advice and did not take
necessary steps to protect his interests, which resulted in a loss of his property rights.

Issues:

Whether the law firm was guilty of professional negligence in providing legal services to the
petitioner?

Whether the petitioner was entitled to compensation for the loss suffered due to the deficient
services of the law firm?

Arguments:

The petitioner argued that the law firm did not provide proper legal advice and did not take
necessary steps to protect his interests, which resulted in a loss of his property rights.

The law firm argued that they had provided adequate legal advice and had taken all necessary
steps to protect the petitioner's interests. They also argued that they had not been paid the full
fee agreed upon.

Reasoning:

The NCDRC observed that the law firm had a duty to exercise reasonable care and skill while
providing legal services to the petitioner. The court noted that the law firm had failed to take
necessary steps to protect the petitioner's interests, which amounted to professional
negligence. The court also observed that the petitioner had paid the full fee agreed upon, and
therefore, the law firm could not use non-payment of fees as an excuse for their deficient
services. The court, therefore, held that the law firm was guilty of professional negligence
and directed them to pay compensation to the petitioner.
Judgment:

The NCDRC held that the law firm, M/s. Arunendra Mishra and Associates, was guilty of
professional negligence in providing legal services to the petitioner, Nishant Mishra. The
court directed the law firm to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 as compensation to the petitioner for
the loss suffered due to their deficient services. The court also directed the law firm to pay
Rs. 50,000 as litigation expenses to the petitioner.

2. Mrs. Krishnaveni vs S. Sadasivam, Consumer Complaint No. 1479 of 2016

(Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission):

Facts:

The complainant, Mrs Krishnaveni, engaged the services of the respondent, S. Sadasivam, an
advocate, for filing a civil suit in a court of law.

The respondent charged a fee of Rs. 25,000 for the services rendered.

The complainant alleged that the respondent did not attend court proceedings regularly and
did not provide proper legal advice, which resulted in the dismissal of her case.

Issues:

Whether the respondent was guilty of professional negligence in providing legal services to
the complainant?

Whether the complainant was entitled to compensation for the loss suffered due to the
deficient services of the respondent?

Arguments:

The complainant argued that the respondent did not attend court proceedings regularly and
did not provide proper legal advice, which resulted in the dismissal of her case.

The respondent argued that he had provided adequate legal advice and had attended court
proceedings regularly. He also argued that the complainant had not paid the full fee agreed
upon.

Reasoning:

The Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission observed that the
respondent had a duty to exercise reasonable care and skill while providing legal services to
the complainant. The commission noted that the respondent had failed to attend court
proceedings regularly and did not provide proper legal advice, which amounted to
professional negligence. The commission also observed that the complainant had paid the full
fee agreed upon, and therefore, the respondent could not use non-payment of fees as an
excuse for their deficient services. The commission, therefore, held that the respondent was
guilty of professional negligence and directed them to pay compensation to the complainant.

Judgment:

The Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that the respondent, S.
Sadasivam, was guilty of professional negligence in providing legal services to the
complainant, Mrs Krishnaveni. The commission directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.
1,00,000 as compensation to the complainant for the loss suffered due to their deficient
services. The commission also directed the respondent to pay Rs. 10,000 as litigation
expenses to the complainant.

3. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. vs Nayan Builders, First Appeal

No. 126 of 2017 (National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission):

Facts:

The appellant, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. (MSEDC), had disconnected
the electricity supply to the respondent, Nayan Builders, due to non-payment of dues. The
respondent approached the Maharashtra State Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC)
for relief, but MERC upheld the decision of the appellant. The respondent then approached
the District Forum, which also upheld the decision of the appellant. The respondent then filed
an appeal before the State Commission, which directed the appellant to reconnect the
electricity supply and pay compensation to the respondent for the loss suffered due to the
disconnection.

Issues:

Whether the disconnection of electricity supply by the appellant was justified?

Whether the respondent was entitled to compensation for the loss suffered due to the
disconnection of electricity supply?

Arguments:
The appellant argued that the disconnection of electricity supply was justified as the
respondent had not paid the dues.

The respondent argued that the disconnection was illegal and arbitrary, and had caused them
a loss of business and reputation.

Reasoning:

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission observed that the disconnection of
electricity supply by the appellant was not justified as the respondent had already paid the
dues. The commission noted that the appellant had not produced any evidence to show that
the dues were outstanding. The commission also observed that the disconnection had caused
the respondent a loss of business and reputation. Therefore, the commission held that the
respondent was entitled to compensation for the loss suffered due to the disconnection of
electricity supply.

Judgment:

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that the disconnection of
electricity supply by the appellant, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co., was not
justified as the respondent, Nayan Builders, had already paid the dues. The commission
directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000 as compensation to the respondent for the
loss suffered due to the disconnection of electricity supply. The commission also directed the
appellant to reconnect the electricity supply to the respondent's premises.
 5. CONCLUSION

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is an important legislation that seeks to protect the rights
of consumers and provide them with a mechanism for redressal of grievances against service
providers. Advocates, who are considered as service providers under the Act, are subject to
its provisions and can be held liable for any deficiency in services or unfair trade practices.

The liability of advocates under the Consumer Protection Act arises due to their professional
duties towards their clients. Advocates are expected to provide quality services to their clients
and act in their best interests. Any breach of this duty can lead to a claim for compensation
under the Act.

The Act provides for the grounds on which advocates can be held liable, including
negligence, misconduct, and breach of duty towards the client. The liability of advocates is
not restricted to their conduct in court, but extends to their dealings with clients outside the
court as well. For instance, an advocate who fails to respond to client queries or provide
timely updates on the progress of a case can be held liable for deficiency in services.

Consumers have the right to file complaints against advocates for any such deficiency or
unfair practice. The Act provides for a mechanism for redressal of consumer grievances,
including the establishment of consumer forums at the district, state, and national level.
Consumers can approach these forums to seek compensation for any harm suffered due to the
negligence or misconduct of an advocate.

The judgments passed in cases such as Nishant Mishra vs Arunendra Mishra and Mrs.
Krishnaveni vs S. Sadasivam have established the liability of advocates under the Consumer
Protection Act. These cases have set important precedents regarding the liability of advocates
for deficiency in services and have provided a framework for the determination of
compensation.

In conclusion, advocates must ensure that they provide quality services to their clients and
conduct themselves ethically to avoid any legal liabilities. They should be aware of their
obligations under the Consumer Protection Act and take steps to ensure compliance. At the
same time, consumers should be aware of their rights and be prepared to take action against
any advocate who fails to meet their expectations. The Act provides an important mechanism
for the protection of consumer rights and advocates must play their part in upholding its
provisions.