Frame guidelines on “reasonable fees” that can be charged by lawyers from individual litigants, Delhi HC to BCI

The Delhi High Court has directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to consider framing guidelines on professional fees charged by lawyers. The Court has also asked BCI to create a resolution mechanism for litigants to air their grievances in respect of the professional fees charged or practices adopted by lawyers..The order was passed by a single Judge Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh in a suit for partition by the Plaintiff, Deepa Bhure..Bhure had retained Advocate PK Chauhan as her counsel in 2014..In January 2019, she preferred an application stating she has withdrawn his services and requested him not to appear in any of her cases. She submitted that she gave various blank signed cheques to Chauhan as security for his professional fee. In spite of instructions to the contrary, Chauhan not only appeared before the Mediation Centre on her behalf but also applied for certified copies of an order and filed an I.A. without her consent..The Plaintiff also alleged that she had even asked Chauhan to return the blank cheques but to no avail. Chauhan then withdrew several amounts on various occasions, without informing her. It is her case that in this manner a total sum of Rs.16,25,000 stood paid to Chauhan, as opposed to the agreed professional fee of Rs.14 lakhs, initially..Chauhan defended his conduct and stated that the Plaintiff had agreed to pay a total fee of Rs 41 lakhs. Since there was an outstanding fee of Rs 32 lakhs, he deposited seven cheques – five cheques of Rs5 lakhs each, one cheque for Rs2 lakhs and one cheque for Rs 50,000 in the bank..He claimed that all the cheques were duly filled by the Plaintiff, and were presented in the bank after intimating her. However, since the Plaintiff issued stop payment instructions in respect of all the cheques and the cheques were dishonoured, he preferred three complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the Plaintiff..After perusing the cheques, the Court found that all of them were presented and dishonoured after the Plaintiff had withdrawn the services of Chauhan..Consequently, counsel appearing for Chauhan submitted before the Court that he was willing to tender an unconditional apology to the Court. He also intimated that he was willing to withdraw all the complaints filed by him against the Plaintiff..Stating that the facts demonstrate misconduct that could be indulged in by lawyers against litigants, the Court observed,.“All the above facts reveal a completely sorry state of affairs inasmuch as a counsel has filed criminal complaints against his own client, leading to the client approaching the Court with various allegations against the counsel.”.It further stated that taking blank cheques as security for fee and encashing the same without permission constitute professional misconduct..“While it may be true that litigants may not pay the agreed fees to lawyers, the same cannot justify the conduct of taking blank cheques as security for fees and encashing the same without the permission of the client. Such practice clearly constitutes professional misconduct to say the least. The filing of criminal complaints against a client due to alleged non-recovery of fees, is the final straw.”.In view of the apology tendered and the undertaking to withdraw the criminal complaints, the Court decided not to take any action against the counsel..It nonetheless directed BCI to put in place some regulation on the manner of charging professional fee by advocates and also for providing a Forum to air grievances of the litigants..As per the order, the guidelines may broadly address the following issues:.Manner of determining the fee consistent with the standing in the Bar, as prescribed in Rule 11 of Bar Council of India Rules;Manner of determining the fee consistent with the nature of the case, as prescribed in Rule 11 of Bar Council of India Rules;Reasonable fee that can be charged by lawyers, especially from individual litigants and whether some broad parameters should be prescribed;Reduction of the fee agreement in writing in some form;Charging of professional fees in kind and whether the same is permissible;Issuance of receipts upon accepting the professional fees and whether the same ought to be mandatory;Insistence of payment of fees in cash beyond the prescribed limits in law;Demanding and accepting security in any form, for professional fee and whether the same is permissible;Permitted modes of recovery of outstanding fees from litigants..The Court has further directed BCI to create a time-bound resolution mechanism including the appointment of an external Ombudsman to deal with any complaints from litigants..As per the directions of the Court, BCI will report on the action taken in terms of the order within six months..Read the order: