Professional Fee of Advocate cannot be Determined after Completion of Case: Madras HC [Read Order]

The Madras High Court ( HC ) in its recent judgement has held that the professional fee of an advocate can’t be determined after the completion of the case.

V.Ayyadurai, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction against the respondents to pay his final fee bill. The Government had passed G.O.Ms. No. 339/Public (Law Officers) Department dated 08.05.2018, wherein the fees for the Law Officers appearing before Arbitrators/Arbitral Tribunal and High of Madras both at Principal Seat and Madurai Bench and in other original side matters had been determined.

After the introduction of this Government Order, further Government Orders had been passed fixing the fees of the petitioner. It was contended that the petitioner had appeared on behalf of the Highways and Minor Ports (HV2) Department in an arbitration case where the claim was Rs. 616,66,83,700/-. The petitioner had appeared up to the stage of filing proof affidavit of R.W.1.  He had raised a fee bill of 25 % out of 1% of the claim of the contractor namely Rs. 1,54,09,250/-.

The petitioner claimed 62.5 % out of 1 % of the claim of the contractor amounting to Rs. 45,43,868/-.  The petitioner was paid by G.O.Ms. No. 182 dated 12.09.2022 and by G.O.Ms. 339, dated 08.05.2018.

He stated that the bills raised were extremely reasonable and in consonance with the structure of the fees to be paid even as determined in the Legal Practitioners Fees Rules, 1973.  Further stated that the law on the date of the transaction should be taken into account and there cannot be a retrospective application of a newly introduced policy.  It was argued that the introduction of a new Government Order cannot be made applicable to a completed transaction.

A Single member bench comprising Justice C V Karthikeyan observed that the petitioner is a professional.  As a professional, his legal skill, knowledge and acumen had been recognized and he had been designated as a Senior Advocate.

The Government Order passed by the Bureaucrats cannot be a benchmark to estimate the skills and knowledge of an advocate who defends a Government order or advances the cause of the policies of the Government.

The Court struck down the consequential G.O. (D) No. 182 HW and MP (HF2) Department dated 21.12.2021 and G.O. (D) No.29 Highways and Minor Ports (HV2) Department dated 01.02.2021 and allowed the writ petition with a direction to the Government to consider the fee bills raised by the petitioner in the light of the professional assistance rendered by the petitioner. 

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates