An advocate cannot act for parties in a dispute if they previously acted as a mediator between them, unless clear evidence shows conflicting responsibilities and confidence reposed.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

I.A. 3869/2019 in CS(OS) 188/2018 and I.A. 10569/2021in CS(OS) 192/2021

1. These are litigations among the members of one family. IA 10569/2021in CS (OS) 192/2021 and IA 3869/2019 in CS (OS) 188/2018, at the instance of Mr. Sandeep Kapur, the plaintiff in CS(OS) 192/2021 and Defendant 1 in CS (OS) 188/2018, object to the appearance of the advocate, who presently appears on behalf of the plaintiffs in CS (OS) 188/2018 and on behalf of the defendants in CS (OS) 192/2021.

2. I have heard Mr. Virmani, learned Senior Counsel for the applicants in these applications at considerable length. Mr. Virmani took me through the history of these litigations and to the involvement of Mr. Singhal in the confabulations which took place during the course of the discussions in this matter.

3. The case set out in these applications, qua the involvement of Mr. Singhal is that Mr. Singhal was a close friend of the family and closely associated with Mr. L.R. Kapur, the late father of the parties in these disputes. Mr. Virmani submits that his client was completely unaware of the involvement of Mr. Singhal in these proceedings. On 3rd December, 2017, the applicant received a legal notice from one Mr. M. K. Dhingra, advocate, who purported to represent the clients on whose behalf, presently, Mr. Singhal is appearing. Following the said notice, CS (OS) 188/2018 was filed by Mr. Dhingra before this Court, on behalf of the said parties. Mr. Singhal appeared on behalf of Mr. Dhingra in the said proceedings on 8th January, 2019 and 11th February, 2019. It was only thereafter, submits Mr. Virmani, that the applicants came to know that Mr. Dhingra was actually a chamber junior/associate of Mr. Singhal. On learning this fact, the applicants, in October, 2019, filed IA 3869/2019 (one of the applications being decided today) for a direction to Mr. Singhal not to represent the plaintiff in CS (OS) 188/2018. The assertion, in the application, on the basis of which this prayer was made, was that Mr. Singhal had acted as a mediator among the parties and the parties, including the applicants in the present case, had exchanged confidences, with respect to the dispute, with Mr. Singhal. Pointed reference is contained, in the application, to meetings which are purported to have taken place in the chamber of Mr. Singhal as well as at the JW Marriott Hotel, Aerocity, New Delhi, to which, according to the applicant, he had travelled with Mr. Singhal, in the applicants' car. Mr. Virmani has drawn my attention to the following paras in IA 3869/2019, wherein the applicants have underscored the involvement of Mr. Singhal in these proceedings. Paras 6, 9A, 9B, 9C and 9E may be reproduced thus:

"6. Prior to the filing of the present suit, Mr. S.C. Singhal, Advocate acting as a mediator, had discussed the subject matter of the suit with both the parties, being the Plaintiffs and Defendant No. 1 with a view to help resolve dispute. Needless to state that the Defendant No. 1 has also trusted and confided in Mr. Singhal, Advocate during the pre-litigation mediation, and otherwise shared with him the details of his defence and his version.

*****

9. It is submitted that neithe