Question

In the following question, a Statement is followed by two Conclusions, I and II. Statement: The Bar Council of India derives its rule-making power from Section 49(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961, which authorises it to frame rules governing professional conduct and etiquette to be observed by advocates. Rule 20 framed thereunder categorically bars an advocate from stipulating for, or receiving, any fee whose quantum is dependent upon the outcome of litigation, or from entering into any arrangement to share in its proceeds. An advocate who contravenes this Rule is liable to be proceeded against under Section 35 of the Act. Conclusion I: An advocate may lawfully enter into an outcome-linked fee arrangement so long as the client's written consent is obtained prior to the engagement. Conclusion II: An advocate who violates the prohibition on contingency-based fees may face disciplinary action under the Advocates Act, 1961.

• A. Only Conclusion II follows
• B. Both Conclusions I and II follow
• C. Neither Conclusion I nor II follows
• D. Only Conclusion I follows

Hint:

Remember: Success Fee = Not Allowed Contingency Fee = Not Allowed Violation of Rule 20 = Professional Misconduct under Section 35.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Read the statement.
The Bar Council of India makes rules under Section 49(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961. Rule 20 stops an advocate from charging a fee that depends on the result of the case or from sharing in the proceeds. Breaking this can lead to action under Section 35.

Step 2: Look at Conclusion I.
Conclusion I says an advocate may take a result-linked fee if the client agrees in writing first.

Step 3: Test Conclusion I.
Rule 20 bans contingency or result-based fees completely. This ban is absolute. The client's written consent cannot make it valid. So Conclusion I does not follow.

Step 4: Look at Conclusion II.
Conclusion II says an advocate who breaks the ban on contingency fees may face disciplinary action under the Act.

Step 5: Test Conclusion II.
The statement itself says a breach of Rule 20 attracts Section 35, which deals with professional misconduct and discipline. So Conclusion II follows directly.

Step 6: Final answer.
Conclusion I is wrong and Conclusion II is right, so only Conclusion II follows.
\[ \boxed{\text{Only Conclusion II follows}} \]