R K KANNAPPAN Vs. K P K KOMALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved for consideration is simple. The complainant engaged the services of the opposite party/appellant herein, who is a Lawyer in connection with the land acquisition proceedings. The Sub-Court, Gobichettipalayam awarded a compensation of Rs.1,82,271.43 for the lands acquired from the complainant. The said amount was later on deposited by the Land Acquisition Officer into Court and the complainant's Counsel was issued a cheque for the said sum on his application. The complainant's Counsel retained a sum of Rs.23,000/- out of the same towards his fees and expenses and gave a cheque to the complainant only for a sum of Rs.1,59,271/-. The complainant alleging that there is deficiency in service and that the retention of Rs.23,000/- by the opposite party is unjustified, laid the complaint.

(2.) The opposite party contended that he represented the complaint even before the Land Acquisition Officer at the time of acquisition and later before the Sub-Court, Gobichettipalayam. Since the complainant was unable to pay any fee, it was agreed between the parties that the complainant would pay 10% towards fees of the amount awarded by the Sub-Court and the expenses to be incurred in conducting the case before the Court at the time of trial and on the realization of the award amount, the said amount shall be deducted and the balance alone need be paid to the complainant.

(3.) The lower Forum did not accept the version of the opposite party and passed an award for a sum of Rs.11,000/- and a cost of Rs.500/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is laid.