False submission (but advocate is same for both statements)

ADVOCATE MAKES STATEMENTS ON BEHALF OF HIS CLIENT ACCORDING TO INFORMATION PROVIDED BY HIS CLIENT  SO YOU CANT DO ANY THING AGAINST THE ADVOCATE
 

Mr. bhargava is right. But you can sue the his client for making two opposite statments. same thing happned with me.I and one other were wrking on profit sharing basis. after we parted ways the fellow through the same lawyer file two suit one aginst me that Iwas his employee and he owns the firms for last 15 yrs and it has been a proprietorship firm all the time  and Iam using his mail Id and firm name and one against our business vendor that he was his partner for sme time and owes him some amount.. both the suits were dismissed with fine.

it is defficult to pin an advocate on such minor matters.

 As per code of conduct by bar council .... advocate is not supposed to be mere mouth piece to the client's deception etc ........  and also supposed to do his best to refrain client from doing anything away from equity!!

But such grievience and disciplinary action is taken up by bar council only

You may at the max ask to debar that counsel from representing your opposite party anymore in that case , from the case as it is an act of obstructing the due process of justice.

first  and Primary duty (and why legal rofession evolved?) ... is be an amicus curie ...................to court of law and court of equity .................. and help the court understand the genuine case/side of one side/party !!

If lawyer can't be an effective amicus curie at least he is not supposed to be misleading the court!!!

(Court has discretionary powers to intervene here ...  if you are let's presenting your case on your own or pro-se then it may look ok!!... but if you are are represented by your lawyer then he would be reluctant  to make such a plea !!    )

Why people are helpless against Pakistan? ............... It is because Pakistan is not an openly self declared rogue state!!! It is beyond the rogue state...

Under the garb of their claim of soverignty ....................  they themselves are harbouring the miscreants!!! and that task is also delegated internally ................... But  they nevre waste a second to apparently show their helplessness to contain it also !!!

But they don't want any infringment on their soverignty also!!!

But if they can't manage it themselves and rather are seen to be obstructing using looholes like this ... do they deserve the soverignty in the first place?

The same helplessness is seens in courts and it has become a bashion of lawyers over there!!

Above case is not a minor matter ... it must be changing the whole character of the case and liable to raise the boubt on the credibility of the party!!!

It wasted the time of court and other party for 3 years!!