The Hindu : National : Larger Supreme Court Bench to decide on status of professionals

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Sep 05, 2005

National

National

Larger Supreme Court Bench to decide on status of professionals

J. Venkatesan

Earlier apex court verdicts not clear on scope of issue

NEW DELHI: A two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has referred to a five-judge Bench the question whether the job of professionals such as lawyers, doctors, authors and artists will fall within the ambit of "commercial activity."

A Bench comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice H.K. Sema referred the matter to Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti for placing it before a larger Bench because the two earlier verdicts of the apex court, by smaller benches, on the status of professionals had not clearly defined the scope of the issue.

The Bench was dealing with a special leave petition filed by the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) against a High Court judgment holding that legal profession did not involve a commercial activity.

The Bench said that as per Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, the term "commerce" was defined as traffic, trade or merchandise in buying and selling of goods, which could not apply to a professional activity, which must be an activity carried out by an individual by his personal skill and intelligence. It noted that there was a fundamental distinction between a professional activity and an activity of a commercial character.

Justice Pasayat, writing the judgment for the Bench, said the special leave petition of the MPSEB could have been dismissed. The Bench said it was referring the issue for determination by a larger Bench since in an earlier judgment, the court had stated that the terms "domestic" and "commercial" had not been defined in the law and these expressions were to be given the common parlance meaning and must be understood in their natural, ordinary and popular sense.

In this case, the MPSEB had charged an advocate for electricity bill on commercial rate for his office established in a rented accommodation, where he was residing earlier.

On a petition from the advocate challenging the Board's action, the High Court held that "office of a lawyer or a firm of lawyers is not a commercial establishment and, therefore, rates applicable to commercial consumers cannot be charged from him." The special leave petition by the Board is directed against this order.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National