HC comes to rescue of man cheated by his own lawyers

Singh,in an application filed in October,had alleged that he was cheated by his lawyer,who gave a false statement on his behalf to the court saying he (Singh) did not want the enhanced compensation.

Aggrieved,Singh had alleged that his lawyer connived with the lawyer of the opposite party and gave a false statement in the court so that the compensation be scaled down.

Terming this a “white lie”,the 64-year-old had moved the High Court. Singh,a resident of Ropar and a retired employee of the Punjab Education Department,has alleged that his lawyer not only cheated him by charging fee but also joined hands with the lawyer of the opposite party and took money from them as well.

Taking serious note of the allegation,the high court had issued notices to both the lawyers,asking them to respond to the allegations. Both are senior lawyers (not designated) practising in the high court for nearly three decades.

In 2010 Singh learned that his lawyer had moved an application on his behalf that the enhanced compensation be scaled down. A paltry amount of Rs 25,000 was awarded by a Ropar court in 1993 as compensation to be paid to Singh. The amount was finally enhanced to Rs 2.25 lakh by the Punjab and Haryana High Court after 15 years,in 2008,with an interest of 9 per cent on the amount.

It took Singh another two years for execution of the high court order and when he went to receive the compensation,he was offered only Rs 1 lakh.

Much to his shock,his lawyer had allegedly moved an application on his behalf in January 2010 that the compensation be brought down to Rs 1 lakh as Singh has entered into a compromise with the opposite party.

For nearly three years,Singh pursued a complaint against the lawyer with the bar council but to no avail. Having lost faith,he had prepared an affidavit and appeared in person demanding recalling of the amended order of the high court wherein the enhanced compensation was brought down. Singh had submitted that he never entered into any agreement or compromise with the opposite party or the insurance company concerned.

“By misrepresenting the facts,the judicial order has been procured at the cost of ailing parents of the deceased,” reads the affidavit filed by Singh.