Ruling saying doctors liable under Consumer Act needs reconsideration: SC

Advocates cannot be held liable under the Act; profession should be distinguished from business: Apex court

Advocates cannot be held liable for deficient service under the Consumer Protection Act, said the Supreme Court on Tuesday, noting that its 1995 ruling saying doctors and other medical professionals are liable under that law needs reconsideration.

A two-judge bench referred to Chief Justice of India for reconsideration by a larger bench the court’s judgment in Indian Medical Association vs. V P Shanta and others decided on November 13, 1995

"Services hired by a client of an advocate would be a contract of personal service and would therefore stand excluded from the definition of service contained in Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019," said the court.

 

“We have categorically said that we do not propose to say that they(advocates) cannot be sued in the ordinary course of law for negligence but they are not covered under the Consumer Protection Act,” Justice Bela M Trivedi clarified.

The bench, also comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal, said the legislature never intended to bring lawyers under the Act. It overruled a 2007 judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission that said their services are covered under Section 2 (o) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

The court said profession should be distinguished from business and trade. “We have said that a profession would require advanced education and training in some branch of learning or science. The nature of work is specialisation and skill, substantial part of which is mental than manual. Having regard to the nature of work of a professional, which requires a high level of education and training and proficiency, and which involves skill and specialised kind of mental work operating in specialised spheres, where actual success depends on various factors beyond one'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," said Justice Trivedi.

However, experts say doctors (working in hospitals) and advocates stand on a different footing. “Doctors who are solo practitioners, however, should stand on the same footing as advocates and can claim exclusion under the definition of service citing their services also being of personal nature,” said Nishant Datta, an advocate at the Delhi High Court.

This does not mean advocates cannot be sued in ordinary courts of law. “While the Supreme Court has kept lawyers outside the purview of the Consumer Protection Act,  in case of any grievance, or complaint,  steps can be taken as per the prevalent laws before the appropriate forum for eg. before the relevant bar council,” said Shruti Maniar, partner at Solomon & Co, a law firm.