In a slipshod manner with biased attribute towards the Advocate

Suit was for Partition and one Badsha Mia was one of the defendants. Appellant was engaged as his lawyer by Badsha Mia.
Subsequently Badsha Mia died and his heirs were substituted. Heirs of Badsha Mia filed a complaint petition alleging that the appellant got .26 acres of suit land purchased in the name of his wife Mrs. Laily Begum during the pendency of the suit, yet he continued to represent the heirs of Badsha Mia though Laily Begum had conflicting interest against him and that the appellant
did not return the documents of Badsha Mia to them—Held : Ext. A is the registered sale deed dated 30.1 2.68 executed by Abdul Majid in favour of the appellants wife Mrs. Laily Begum whereby Abdul Majid sold .26 acres out of the suit land to Laily Begum during pendency of the suit. It is stated in the sale deed that Badsha Mia sold 26 acres of land to Abdul Majid by a registered sale deed on 13.4.60—we hold that the learned Advocate did not commit any professional Misconduct in representing several defendants separately in the partition suit having no conflicting interest among them.

Abdul Hamid Advocate Vs. Bangladesh. Bar Council & Ors. 5 BLT (HCD)-11.