Thread by @barandbench

Delhi High Court begins hearing Rajiv Luthra's appeal against order staying the termination of Mohit Saraf from L l&L Partnership.

Hearing before Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Sanjeev Narula.

#RajivLuthra #MohitSaraf

My endeavour is to cover what has not been covered by Mr Tripathi: Senior Advocate Vikas Singh for Mohit Saraf begins.

I joined the firm in 1995 as an employee. Mr Luthra's erstwhile firm.. the intension of the deed is that after certain years, I will not leave. Only he will leave : Singh

This clause was not read by Mr Singhvi: Singh

Singh reads the clause.

His (Luthra's) right to manage cleints exclusively was to end of this date (in 2003) : Singh

Singh reads the deed.

It was very clearly defined who if he leaves would get what : Singh as he continues to read.

If I left before 2003, I would not be entitled to goodwill. If I was asked to leave, I was entitled to be paid: Singh

After 31/10/2003, the parties were to be paid a certain value, Singh says.

Singh continues to read.

In a two partner firm, partnership can't be with one when one partner leaves. It can't be done after 12 years from effective date. I can't leave. Only he can : Singh

The break up is expressly provided. After 12 years, you can't take the firm. The firm will remain with me : Singh

This was all carefully drafted. He placed a certain amount of confidence in my ability.. : Singh

I was made a partner and others wasn't. Some of them are still with the firm : Singh

Others weren't*

If he decides to go out, he would not get the firm name: Singh as reads the deed.

After a particular date, there was no way he (Luthra) could continue to use the firm goodwill and practice law: Singh

Singh refers to communication between Saraf and Luthra concerning the latter's retirement.

This is all coming in from 9/7/2019 till 30/6/2020: Singh

I would beseech your lordship to exercise power under O31 R33 .. the only argument they have made is of prejudice. My first prayer of stay was granted (in section 9): Singh

Singh reads the other prayers made in section 9 Petition.

The way things had been sour, he had the right the participate, but he wasn't participating in decision making: Singh

This was a muta marriage for a limited period. He would get money only he would decide not to practice law.. he can't ask me to leave the firm after 12 years: Singh

I say you by your action have exercised the option of retire.. He has not challenged it till date.. he feels he has bouncers: Singh

This notice has not been challenged: Singh as he states that Luthra said that he had spoken to the Delhi CP to restrain Saraf.

Senior Adv Abhishek Manu Singhvi objects.

We also have a long rejoinder: Singhvi

You will have a long rejoinder because you've not argued anything.

If matter is already referred to Arbitration and he himself has no rights (over clients)..I have him much confidence from 1995 and 1999.. after 2011, he can't kick me out and retain the firm : Singh

Admittedly I was running the firm for all these years. He wasn't into the actual working of the firm. To give him premium for putting bouncers and not following the order of the single judge.. : Singh

This is how he interprets the status quo order of this court : Singh as he reads a communication by Luthra.

This is dates 12/2/2021 after the interim order restoring my status but not giving me physical access : Singh

That after 13/10, I am not entitled to anything and it will be decided after division bench order : Singh

The court can appoint a partner as a receiver : Singh reads commentaries on this aspect.

It can be appointed without there being a prayer. My prayer is there in effect. I'm asking him to be restrained.. in that sense I'll be the receiver: Singh

They have not made out any fault on the in single judge judgement. They have not made out any perversity.. : Singh

Singh reads a Bombay High Court judgement.

I definitely have made out a case that I'm the law abiding person z I've been running the firm. I gave him the confidence to sign the document which completely cut out his right after 12 years ...his conduct was clear that he wanted to leave the firm : Singh

He will have to take a call before the Arbitrator whether he wants to practice (in order to determine whether any money is to be paid).. There is no way he can continue if there is a difference of opinion after 12 years. He cannot expel me for any value : Singh

Just see his own communication. I won't read it because the press also hears all this : Singh on the financial state of the firm

So definitely a wrong statement was made that revenues have gone up. They have not come clean to this court : Singh

This statement is definitely a wrong statement (on firm's revenue soaring). The accruals are not be confused with the billings: Singh

60 lawyers and 7 partners have left the firm : Singh

You start another day, Mr Singhvi : Court

The court may give me 22nd: Singhvi

I'll take a little time to assist after Dr Singhvi: Senior Adv Sidharth Luthra.

Hearing adjourned till March 22.

Thereafter, the matter would be taken up on April 6.

Try to finish on that day : Court

Hearing over.