RD Saxena vs Balaram Prasad Sharma
AIR 2000 SC 2912
Case Summary
[Definition of Goods]
[Right of Lien]
Facts
The Appellant was an advocate hired by Madhya Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Ltd.
The Bank had terminated his position and requested the return of their case files
The appellant refused to return them, due to unpaid fees amounting to Rs. 97,000 and asserted his right of lien.
The Bank filed a complaint alleging professional misconduct for non-return of the files.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) held Saxena guilty of professional misconduct and debarred him from practice for 18 months, imposing a fine of ₹1,000 and directing him to return the files.
Saxena then appealed this fine.
Issues
Whether an advocate has a lien on litigation files entrusted to them by their client for unpaid fees?
Key Legal Provisions
Indian Contract Act, 1870
Section 171 - Permits certain professionals to retain goods bailed to them as security for unpaid dues unless a contract specifies otherwise.
Sales of Goods Act, 1930
Section 2(7) - Definition of "goods" as all kinds of movable property except actionable claims and money, including growing crops and shares.
Judgement
The Supreme Court held that:
An advocate cannot have the right to lien over litigation files.
Section 171 employs the definition of "goods" from Section 2(7) of the Sales of Goods Act.
As per the provision of these acts, the goods retained in lien must be marketable. Litigation files do not come under this purview.
This could further harm the litigant's case.
Comentários