"What happened to our ability to say no?" Bombay High Court aghast at lawyer appearing for opposing parties

Justice Gautam Patel of the Bombay High Court today expressed his shock and dismay upon finding that a lawyer appearing for the plaintiff in a case had previously appeared for the defendant in another proceeding..The Court was told that the lawyer had appeared in insolvency proceedings on behalf of the defendant company, and was now appearing against the same company in the present commercial suit, in conflict of his interest. .Miffed with this conduct by the lawyer, Justice Patel vacated an ad-interim relief running in favour of the plaintiff."I am not going to continue this relief you have. You do what you want. I know our standards have slipped, but this much! There is no consideration of any consequence any longer," Justice Patel told the counsel briefed by the said lawyer. ."What happened to our ability to say no! I don't understand how this lawyer entertained the plaintiff in his office, forget drafting the plaint and taking instructions. Is it possible to say that, that (the other proceeding) was a different matter?" Justice Patel demanded. .Accepting that the practice of getting another lawyer to appear for your client in case of conflict was a prevalent practice, Justice Patel, however, was disappointed to find out that the lawyer had not even attempted to conceal it."I know how it is done to get around, but here there is no pretence. Maybe we should just shop on the original side (jurisdiction of Bombay High Court) and go! Just close it down, because this has become a market place," Justice Patel said. .The arguing counsel tried to apologise on behalf of the lawyer and informed the Court that the plaintiffs were in the process of changing their advocate on record. They thus requested for time to take instructions on the same. However, Justice Patel refused to accede to such request. He said, "I am letting this go for a reason, but I am close to passing strictures. The lawyer is going to pay the consequences. Unfortunately, his client will also. I won't even let you withdraw this now. Of all the lawyers in the world, the client had to walk into this lawyer's chamber only?".Before adjourning the matter, the Justice Patel asked the arguing counsel to convey to the lawyer that maintaining a reputation was of utmost importance while in litigation. "I don't want to be too preachy, but these people need to understand, to stay in this profession, you need one asset - your reputation. Please convey this to your lawyer that judges do not live in isolation, as much as you believe," Justice Patel emphasised.