Advocate Acting As Real Estate Agent & Selling Client's Property Amounts To Misconduct : Supreme Court Upholds BCI Penalty

The Supreme Court recently upheld a decision of the Bar Council of India to suspend an advocate for 5 years for gross professional misconduct after it was revealed that he had acquired a General Power of Attorney from his own client in a property-related case and subsequently sold the property.

The bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal was hearing an appeal from BCI’s decision which had suspended the advocate for 5 years on account of professional misconduct.

The disciplinary action stemmed from an inquiry conducted by the Bar Council. The Bar Council found that this was a case of professional misconduct as admittedly the appellant had taken a General Power of Attorney from his own client in respect of the property which was the subject matter of the suit in which the appellant was representing him. Moreover, the appellant could not produce any evidence to show that the consideration received by him was paid over to his client.

His reply before the disciplinary committee read as follows- “The Respondent submits that he was also acting as the business of Real-Estate for selling and buying the properties as a Real-Estate Agent…. accordingly the Respondent arranged to sell her half site and consideration amount was paid to her in cash and she paid the Respondent 2% commission for the sale of the property and it was done as Real-Estate Agent, not as an Advocate.”

The Supreme Court held that the above statement of the appellant suggested that he was acting as a Real-Estate Agent while practising as an Advocate and that amounted to misconduct.

“The appellant himself has come out with a case that while practicing as an advocate, he was also carrying on a business of selling and buying the properties as a real estate Agent. The appellant has also stated that the transaction with his client was in his capacity as a real estate Agent. Thus, the statement made by the appellant on oath makes out a case of gross professional misconduct on his part apart from the misconduct already held as proved by the impugned order. Therefore, the direction to suspend him as an Advocate for five years is fully justified", the Court observed.

Related News - Advocate Didn't Disclose That His Wife Was Opposite Party In Client's Case : Supreme Court Upholds BCI Penalty

Case : SYED ALTAF AHMED v.S. SUSON

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 767

Click here to read the order