Delhi High Court Quashes Complaint Against Lawyer's Office in Residential Basement
Court rules legal profession not a commercial activity, permits office use under Master Development Plan and Delhi Building Bye-laws
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed the long-standing complaint against B.K. Sood, a practicing advocate, accused of misusing a residential basement for running his professional office. The judgment, delivered by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, emphasizes that legal services rendered by a lawyer do not constitute a commercial activity and that the use of residential premises for a lawyer's office, adhering to the Master Development Plan (MDP), 2001, and Delhi Building Bye-laws, 1983, is lawful.
The complaint was filed by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) under Sections 252 and 369(1) of the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994, alleging unauthorized use of the basement for commercial purposes. However, the court clarified that professional services, such as those offered by lawyers, are distinct from commercial activities, which involve trading or profit-driven operations.
The court further highlighted that the MDP, 2001, and the Delhi Building Bye-laws, 1983, permit the use of basements for office purposes, provided they are air-conditioned. The petitioner’s premises met these conditions, reinforcing that there was no misuse of the property.
Justice Krishna referred to several precedents, including the Supreme Court's stance that a lawyer's office is not a commercial establishment, to underline the professional nature of legal services. The court also noted that the complaint, pending for over 22 years, lacked substantial evidence and its continuation would be an abuse of the judicial process.
This judgment sets a precedent for similar cases, affirming the professional status of legal services and the permissible use of residential spaces for professional activities under specified conditions.
Bottom Line:
Legal profession is not a commercial activity, and the use of residential premises for a lawyer's professional office to the extent permissible under Master Development Plan (MDP), 2001 and Delhi Building Bye-laws, 1983, does not amount to misuse of property.
Statutory provision(s): New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 Section 252, Section 369(1); Master Development Plan, 2001; Delhi Building Bye-laws, 1983; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482.
B. K. Sood v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2791613
