FA.No.567/2008 against CC.No.426/2007 District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I,Hyderabad.

Between-

S.Suresh,

H.No.4-6-84, 2^nd Floor, Pan Bazar,

Secunderabad – 500 003.

…Appellant/Complainant.

And

Sri T.Jai Kisan Das,

Advocate,

H.No.4-6-230, Subhas Road,

Secunderabad – 500 003.

…Respondent/Opp.Party.

For the Appellant                      - Party-in-person.

For the Respondent                  - Admn. Stage.

QUORUM-THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,

SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE LADY MEMBER,

AND

SRI G.BHOOPATHI REDDY, HON’BLE MALE MEMBER.

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL,

TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.

Oral Order (Per Hon’ble Mr.Justice D.Appa Rao, President)

------- 

1.         This is an appeal preferred by an unsuccessful complainant against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, Hyderabad, dated 04.04.2008 in CC.No.426/2007, in rejecting his complaint.  

2.         The case of the complainant in brief is that his mother, S.Shakuntala is the absolute owner and possessor of  some property situated at Secunderabad, wherein she got constructed flats by entering into a development agreement.  The complainant’s mother alleged that the purchasers, who purchased the portions from the developer, had violated the conditions of the sale deed causing inconvenience to her and others.  On that the complainant and others engaged the opposite party, Sri T.Jai Kisan Das, an advocate, who in turn entrusted the brief to another advocate, Sri B.Viswanatham, who filed suit and obtained injunction order.  Later the order of injunction was vacated on contest.  The he along with his father filed CMA 113/2006.  However, in the meantime the advocate, who had taken up his case also accepted brief of his brother, who had conflicted interest with him.  He ought not to have accepted the brief of his brother, which was filed against him.  On that the opposite party advocate sent letter dated 19.01.2007 stating that since he was appearing in another suit against the complainant, he was not willing to appear in CMA 113/2006, and requested to engage another advocate.  He also mentioned that he has no objection for him to engage another advocate.  The complainant alleged that he did not return the relevant documents and the fee.  Without giving advance notice, he withdrew his appearance, which constitutes breach of contract and, therefore, he claimed compensation. 

3.         The opposite party, the advocate resisted the mater.  He alleged that the complainant did not approach him, and on the other hand, his brother and his father approached him.  The complainant’s mother has filed an injunction suit against the builder and other purchasers of the flats.  The builder also filed a suit in OS.No.14 of 2006 and obtained injunction in IA.No.30/2006 on the file of  1^st Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad.  In the said suit one K.B.Vishwanath, advocate, appeared for the complainant’s mother and her two sons.  The complainant never approached him for filing the appeal in the said case.  Complainant’s brother paid Rs.1,500/- for preferring an appeal and Rs.2,000/- towards fee.  Subsequently, the complainant’s brother requested him to appear in another case filed by the complainant against the purchasers of three flats .  Then he could know that there were differences between the complainant and his brother and father.  Since there was conflict of interest , he was not interested to proceed in CMA 113/2006.  He refunded Rs.500/-to the complainant.  He filed a memo stating that he was not representing the case.  He learnt that the complainant, his brother and his father engaged one Sailesh Trivedi.  K.B.Vishwanath was also on record.  The complainant  was bent upon harassing him.  A complaint was also filed against him before the Bar Council of A.P.High Court alleging professional misconduct, and therefore, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.         The complainant filed Exs.A.1 to A.24.  The opposite party filed a copy of the order passed by Bar Council along with the copy of an order passed in CC 172/2007 by the District Forum-II filed by the complainant against the builder, which was dismissed. 

5.         The District Forum after considering the record opined that the opposite party / advocate endorsed No Objection on Vakalat to the complainant for engaging another advocate to proceed with the case, on the ground he had taken up case against the complainant filed by his brother. He cannot represent both in view of conflict of interest between them.  In fact in order to avoid misunderstandings, he gave no objection vakalat.  He also enclosed letter dated 17.02.2007 addressed by the complainant to his mother, in which he blamed his mother, alleging that she was partisan towards his brother.  The tenor of the letter speaks volumes of the sensitive mind and attitude of the complainant.  The record discloses that the complainant had not engaged him for filing CMA 113/2006.  Stating the above grounds, the complaint was dismissed.

6.         Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal contending that he appeared along with his father and brothers, and if he has not given vakalat, he could not have filed CMA against the orders of injunction.  The opposite party did not intimate him about non-payment of fee at any time.  The non giving of  no objection vakalat to him amounts to deficiency in service and therefore, prayed that the complaint be allowed. 

7.         Heard the appellant in person.  We deem it that it is a fit case where the appeal could be disposed of at the stage of admission. 

8.         It is an undisputed fact that that the complainant is also a party to the suit as well as CMA filed by him along with his brother and mother.  It is also not in dispute that the complainant’s brother filed a Criminal Case against him.  It is also not in dispute that there were misunderstandings between the complainant and his father and brother.  In view of the admitted dispute between the complainant, his mother and father and brothers interse, the advocate against whom the complaint was filed, informed that he could not defend the complainant, more so, when he filed a complaint against him.  Despite the fact that the opposite party/advocate had given no objection on the vakalat  for the complainant to engage another advocate, evident from his own affidavit filed in the case, still the complainant alleges that no objection vakalat was not given with an endorsement ‘No Objection’.  Considering the disputes between the complainant and his brother and others interse,  the respondent/advocate is justified in not defending him in the said case.  He filed a memo to that effect.  Therefore, it cannot be said that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  In the light of contentions taken, we feel that the opposite party i.e. respondent herein, could have addressed another letter directly to the complainant mentioning that he had no objection for his engaging another advocate.  His main contention was that he could not engage another advocate as he did not find no objection on the vakalat.  The opposite party advocate can as well address a letter to the complainant stating that he can engage another advocate along with a vakalat making endorsement of ‘No Objection’.  Except this, we do not see any merits in the appeal.

9.         With this observation, the appeal is dismissed.  No costs.

PRESIDENT               LADY MEMBER               MALE MEMBER

DT-25.04.2008.

Vvr.