SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

Care | Courage | Competence | Collaboration

CONSTITUENT OF
SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED UNIVERSITY)
Reaccredited by NAAC with 'A' Grade

Symbiosis Campus, Opp. Pune InternationalAirport,

Symbiosis Road, Viman Nagar, Pune 411 014.

CLINICAL COURSE - IV - JOURNAL

(MOOT COURT EXERCISE AND
INTERNSHIP)
V YEAR OF BA./BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

Academic Year : 2023-2024

SEMESTER - IX

Name of Student : IONI D’SOUZA

Exam. Seat No. :

Roll No. : Div. :

Batch : Programme : BA. / BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

PRN No.: Mobile No. :

E-mail ID :
 4.1) INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES
4.1.1) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS – 1(CIVIL)

1. IN THE CHAMBER OF :
M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others Vs. Mr. Ramen Lakhar

2. PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT :

Appellant / Plaintiff: M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others

Nature of Entity: Dealership firm affiliated with Hyundai Motors India Ltd. Business
Address: Kushan Plaza, G.S. Road, Wadala, Mumbai.

3. DATE : 20 th
July 2023

4. INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR

HIS/HER CLIENT :
(MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)
Understanding the case from the client's perspective is a crucial aspect of the interview process for
a lawyer. During the interview, it's important for the lawyer to uphold their professional and
ethical responsibilities and to address potential legal issues that might arise from the conversation.
Here's how Adv. Venkatesh Shewale conducted the interview with Mr. Pranav Reddy:
Part I: Understanding the Facts of the Case and Client's Involvement
Adv. Venkatesh Shewale commenced the interview by delving into the specific details of the
case, aiming to comprehend Mr. Pranav Reddy's role and involvement. As an old client, personal
details like name, occupation, and place of residence were already established, obviating the need
for further inquiries in that regard. Adv. Shewale's familiarity with Mr. Reddy and his background
facilitated a smoother discussion of the case's particulars.
During this part of the interview, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale guided Mr. Reddy through a detailed
narration of the events that led to the legal dispute. The focus was on grasping the sequence of
occurrences, relevant individuals, any agreements or commitments made, and the overall context.
By actively listening and asking open-ended questions, Adv. Shewale ensured a comprehensive
understanding of Mr. Reddy's perspective on the matter.
Part II: Understanding Jurisdiction and International Aspects
Transitioning to the second phase of the interview, Adv. Shewale addressed the potential
jurisdictional complexities, particularly due to the international nature of the case. To tackle this,
he proactively reached out to a lawyer in Dubai who he was acquainted with, seeking insights into
the legal landscape in that jurisdiction. This demonstrates Adv. Shewale's commitment to
ensuring a well-informed approach to the case, despite its cross-border implications.
Part III: Establishing Possible Grounds for the Case
In the final stage of the interview, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale worked with Mr. Pranav Reddy to
identify and outline the possible legal grounds on which the case could be built. This involved
exploring the relevant laws, regulations, and precedents that might apply to the situation. By
 collaborating with Mr. Reddy, Adv. Shewale aimed to establish a clear framework for building a
strong legal argument in the upcoming proceedings.
Throughout the interview, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale maintained a professional and ethical
demeanor, respecting client confidentiality and ensuring that the conversation was focused on
gathering pertinent information for the case. By meticulously following the structured three-step
approach, Adv. Shewale demonstrated his dedication to understanding the nuances of the case,
addressing potential complexities, and providing a solid foundation for proposing an effective
legal solution.

5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

The plaintiffs, M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others, are a dealership entity affiliated with Hyundai
Motors India Ltd. The defendant, Sri Ramen Lahkar, is at the center of a legal dispute stemming
from a car repair transaction. The incident took place at the plaintiff's establishment situated at
Kushan Plaza, G.S. Road, Ganeshguri. The plaintiffs specialize in automobile services, including
vehicle repair and maintenance.
On May 25, 2023, the defendant brought his Hyundai Verna car with the registration number MH
01-AG-6100 to the plaintiff's workshop to address accidental damages. The plaintiffs executed the
necessary repair work as per Repair Order No R200907652. After the repair, an invoice
amounting to Rs 1,00,736/- was generated for the repair costs.
Crucially, the defendant verbally committed to settling the invoiced amount within a month.
However, he allegedly failed to fulfill this payment commitment, resulting in a breach of
obligation to remunerate the repair costs.
Despite repeated reminders and a formal legal notice, the defendant remained unresponsive and
did not display any intention to settle the outstanding dues. In response, the plaintiffs initiated a
legal suit seeking a monetary decree to recover the outstanding amount of Rs 1,00,736/- along
with accrued interest of Rs 12,79.50/-, calculated at a rate of 10% per annum.
In their arguments, the plaintiffs, represented by Mr. P.K. Deka, highlighted the defendant's
commitment to pay for the repairs, the issuance of the legal notice, and their efforts to recover the
payment. On the other hand, the defendant, represented by Mr. D. K. Kothari, denied the accident
and damage claim, questioned the authenticity of the Repair Order and invoice, and sought the
dismissal of the case.
The case revolves around the plaintiffs' claim for payment of repair costs and accrued interest,
while the defendant disputes the authenticity of the repair work and the associated invoices.

6. LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF

EVIDENCE :
1. Repair Order (R200907652): A copy of the repair order that outlines the details of the
repair work performed on the defendant's Hyundai Verna car, including the description of
damages, parts replaced, and the costs associated.
2. Invoice: A copy of the invoice issued to the defendant, detailing the breakdown of the
repair costs, labor charges, parts used, and any other expenses incurred during the repair
process.
 3. Payment Commitment Evidence: Any documented evidence of the defendant's verbal
commitment to pay for the repair costs within a month, such as notes, emails, text
messages, or witnesses who were present during the commitment.
4. Communication Records: Copies of any written communication between the plaintiffs and
the defendant regarding the repair work, payment reminders, or discussions related to the
outstanding amount.
5. Legal Notice (Dated July 4, 2023): A copy of the formal legal notice dispatched to the
defendant, stating the outstanding amount and the demand for payment within a specified
timeframe, along with proof of delivery.
6. Defendant's Responses: Copies of any responses, if any, from the defendant to the legal
notice or subsequent correspondence related to the dispute.
7. Witness Statements: Affidavits or statements from any witnesses who can attest to the
defendant's verbal commitment to pay for the repair work within a month.
8. Photographic Evidence: Photographs of the defendant's car before and after the repair
work to provide visual documentation of the damages and the repair outcomes.
9. Technician Testimonies: Statements from the technicians who carried out the repair work,
confirming the nature of the damages, the repairs performed, and their professional
assessment.
10. Proof of Delivery of Notice: Evidence of the delivery of the legal notice to the defendant,
such as courier receipts, tracking information, or acknowledgment of receipt.
11. Accounting Records: Financial records showing the outstanding amount, any interest
calculations, and any attempts to reconcile the accounts.
12. Expert Opinions: If necessary, expert opinions from professionals in the field confirming
the validity and accuracy of the repair work carried out.
13. Contract or Service Agreement: If there was any written contract or service agreement
between the plaintiffs and the defendant, a copy of this document could be relevant.
14. Correspondence Log: A chronological log of all communications with the defendant,
including dates, methods, and content of each interaction.
15. Bank Statements or Payment Records: If any partial payments were made by the
defendant, records of these payments and their corresponding dates.

7. COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE :

1. Review and Organize Documents: Thoroughly review and organize relevant documents,
such as the Repair Order, invoice, and communication records.
2. Conduct Legal Research: Research applicable laws and regulations related to contract
disputes and non-payment cases.
3. Consult with Dubai Lawyer: Continue collaborating with the Dubai lawyer to understand
international jurisdiction implications.
4. Interview Witnesses: Gather statements or affidavits from witnesses confirming the
defendant's payment commitment.
5. Analyze Repair Records: Examine repair records and technician statements to verify the
legitimacy of repair costs.
 6. Assess Counterclaims: Address the defendant's concerns about the authenticity of the
Repair Order and invoice.
7. Evaluate Settlement Options: Consider negotiation or mediation to resolve the dispute
before court proceedings.
8. Draft Legal Petition: Draft a comprehensive legal petition outlining the case's merits and
client's perspective.
9. Prepare Court Strategy: Develop a strategic approach for presenting the case in court,
including key points and witnesses.
10. Advocate for Fair Resolution: Present a compelling case in court that highlights the
defendant's commitment and breach of payment obligation.

8. OBSERVATION IF ANY :
1. Structured Approach: Adv. Venkatesh Shewale's decision to use a structured three-step
method for the interview showcases a well-organized and systematic approach to
gathering information.
2. Professional Preparedness: The advocate's prior research and familiarity with Mr. Reddy's
background as an old client demonstrate a high level of professional preparedness and
attention to detail.
3. Cross-Border Consideration: Consulting a lawyer in Dubai to understand international
jurisdiction reflects a proactive approach to addressing potential complexities in the case.
4. Client-Centered Focus: Adv. Shewale's emphasis on understanding the case from Mr.
Reddy's perspective indicates a client-centered approach, which is essential for building a
strong legal strategy.
5. Evidence Collection: The interview's focus on gathering evidence, such as the defendant's
commitment and related communications, highlights the advocate's intent to build a robust
case.
6. Collaboration: The involvement of witnesses and collaboration with technicians
underscores the advocate's intention to gather corroborative evidence and expert opinions.
7. Thoroughness: The advocate's inclination to analyze repair records and address
counterclaims illustrates a thorough examination of the case from multiple angles.
8. Negotiation and Mediation: The consideration of settlement options reflects the advocate's
understanding of the benefits of exploring alternative dispute resolution methods before
litigation.
9. Clear Communication: Adv. Shewale's structured approach likely facilitated clear
communication between the advocate and the client, aiding in accurate information
gathering.

9. SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCATE

58
 4.1) INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES
4.1.2) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS – II
(CRIMINAL)

1. IN THE CHAMBER OF:

2. PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT :

3. DATE :

59
4. INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
HIS/HER CLIENT :
(MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)
Structured Interview: During the structured interview, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale methodically
approached the interview process, keeping in mind the main purpose of understanding the case
from Mr. Sachin Sonave's perspective and proposing appropriate solutions. Given Mr. Sonave's
status as an old client, the initial need to inquire about basic details was bypassed. Adv. Shewale's
familiarity with Mr. Sonave's background aided in establishing a comfortable environment for the
interview.

Part I: Understanding the Facts and Client's Involvement Adv. Shewale began by delving into the
specific details of the case. He aimed to grasp Mr. Sonave's role and involvement in the events
leading up to the murder. This phase involved a comprehensive exploration of the sequence of
events, Mr. Sonave's interactions with co-accused, and his connection to the deceased partners.
Open-ended questions allowed Mr. Sonave to provide a detailed account of his perspective on the
night of the incident.

Part II: Understanding Jurisdiction Adv. Shewale recognized the significance of jurisdiction,
particularly given the international aspect of the case. To address this, he took proactive steps by
contacting a lawyer in Dubai, where Mr. Sonave had connections. This demonstrated Adv.
Shewale's commitment to understanding all relevant legal dimensions that might impact the case's
outcome.

Part III: Establishing Possible Grounds In this phase, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale collaborated with
Mr. Sonave to establish potential legal grounds for the case. They discussed the key aspects that
could form the foundation of the defense strategy. This involved assessing the strength of
arguments related to lack of motive, flaws in circumstantial evidence, reliance on legal
precedents, and humanitarian considerations.

Follow-Up Questions: Adv. Shewale, as part of the follow-up questions method, engaged in a
deeper exploration of specific details that emerged during the structured interview. These
questions aimed to clarify any ambiguities and gather additional information that could contribute
to a comprehensive understanding of the case.

Throughout the interview, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale upheld his professional and ethical
responsibilities. He remained focused on the case's legal aspects and implications, while also
ensuring that Mr. Sonave's perspective was thoroughly considered. This structured approach
allowed Adv. Shewale to gather essential insights, identify potential legal avenues, and propose a
well-informed course of action for Mr. Sonave's defense.

5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

 The case centers around a murder that took place in Pune on November 25th, 2019. The victim
was discovered with multiple stab wounds in an alley. The key individuals involved are Mr.
Sachin Sonave, the petitioner, and Mr. Tilak Gaikwad and Mr. Vasant More, who are co-accused
in the case.
Mr. Sachin Sonave is a resident of Mumbai and operates a small enterprise in Dadar. He shares a
long-standing friendship with Mr. Vasant More and is also acquainted with Mr. Tilak Gaikwad.
The latter is the cousin of Mr. More and the son of a local political leader. The deceased
individuals, Mr. Ram Lakhani and Mr. Lohit Bata, were partners in a textile business. They
sought partnership with Mr. Gaikwad but allegedly did not fulfill their end of the agreement,
exploiting Mr. Gaikwad in the process.
On the night of the incident, Mr. Sonave was called to Mr. Gaikwad's house, where he discovered
the lifeless bodies of Mr. Lakhani and Mr. Bata. He was handed the murder weapon, a knife, by
an unknown individual. Subsequently, all accused were apprehended by the police, and the trial
commenced.
During the trial, circumstantial evidence linked Mr. Sonave to the crime. He was found near the
crime scene with the murder weapon and was also connected to Mr. Gaikwad and Mr. More
through telephonic records. Witnesses testified to seeing Mr. Sonave at the location during the
time of the murder. However, Mr. Sonave consistently maintained his innocence, asserting that he
had been framed and had no motive to commit the crime.
The case gained substantial attention due to the involvement of prominent individuals and the
complexity of the evidence presented. The prosecution relied heavily on circumstantial evidence,
including witness statements, telephonic records, and the murder weapon, to build a case against
Mr. Sonave. The defense, on the other hand, challenged the reliability of the evidence, questioned
the motives for the crime, and sought to highlight flaws in the prosecution's case.
The case eventually reached the High Court, where Mr. More and Mr. Gaikwad were acquitted,
and Mr. Sonave was convicted based on circumstantial grounds. However, the appeal was
subsequently allowed by the Supreme Court, leading to a deeper examination of the evidence and
legal arguments presented by both sides.

6. LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF

EVIDENCE :
1. Here is a list of relevant documents that would be essential for the purpose of evidence in
this case:
2. Crime Scene Photographs: Visual documentation of the crime scene, including the
location of the bodies, the murder weapon, and other relevant details.
3. Autopsy Report: A detailed report from the autopsy conducted on the deceased
individuals, indicating the cause of death, number of stab wounds, and any other relevant
findings.
4. Witness Statements: Sworn statements from witnesses who saw Mr. Sonave near the crime
scene or observed any suspicious activity on the night of the incident.
5. Telephonic Records: Records of phone calls and text messages exchanged between Mr.
Sonave, Mr. More, and Mr. Gaikwad around the time of the murder.
 6. Police Reports: Official reports filed by the police detailing the investigation process,
actions taken, and initial findings.
7. Forensic Reports: Reports from forensic experts analyzing the murder weapon for
fingerprints, DNA, and any other trace evidence that could link Mr. Sonave to the crime.
8. Medical Records: Medical records and reports related to injuries sustained by Mr. Sonave,
if any, during the incident.
9. Financial Records: Financial transactions, bank statements, and records of any financial
dealings between the accused individuals that could provide insight into motives or
connections.
10. Surveillance Footage: CCTV footage from cameras in the vicinity of the crime scene, if
available, to corroborate witness statements or identify any suspicious activity.
11. Statements of Accused: Statements given by Mr. More and Mr. Gaikwad to the police or
during the trial, regarding their knowledge of the incident and their interactions with Mr.
Sonave.
12. Character References: Character references or testimonials about Mr. Sonave's reputation
and conduct, highlighting his standing within the community.
13. Legal Precedents: Relevant legal precedents cited by both the prosecution and the defense
to support their arguments.
14. Expert Testimonies: Expert testimonies from professionals in areas such as forensics,
telecommunications, and psychology, providing insights into various aspects of the case.
15. Chain of Custody Records: Records detailing the handling and custody of evidence,
ensuring the integrity of the evidence presented in court.
16. Defense's Case File: Documents prepared by the defense, including legal briefs,
arguments, and strategies planned for the trial.

7. COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE :

1. Here's a suggested course of action that the advocate might envision based on the
information provided in the case:
1. Comprehensive Review of Evidence: The advocate should thoroughly review all available
evidence, including witness statements, telephonic records, forensic reports, and any other
relevant documents. This will provide a solid foundation for building the defense strategy.
2. In-Depth Interviews: Conduct in-depth interviews with Mr. Sachin Sonave to gain a
thorough understanding of his perspective, his interactions with the co-accused, and the
events leading up to the incident. This will help identify potential inconsistencies in the
prosecution's case and uncover any overlooked details.
3. Evaluate Circumstantial Evidence: Carefully analyze the circumstantial evidence
presented by the prosecution. Scrutinize the reliability of witnesses, question the
interpretation of telephonic records, and assess the forensic reports for any discrepancies.
4. Expert Consultation: Engage relevant experts such as forensic analysts,
telecommunications specialists, and criminal psychologists to provide expert opinions that
challenge the prosecution's case. Their insights can help cast doubt on the reliability of
certain evidence and create a more robust defense.
5. Establish Lack of Motive: Thoroughly investigate the alleged motive behind Mr. Sonave's
 involvement in the crime. Gather evidence and testimonies that demonstrate his lack of
motive to commit the murder, given his friendship with Mr. More and his own reputation.
6. Highlight Inconsistencies: Identify inconsistencies in the prosecution's narrative and
present them in a clear and compelling manner during the trial. Show how these
inconsistencies raise reasonable doubt about Mr. Sonave's guilt.
7. Cross-Examination Strategy: Develop a strong cross-examination strategy for challenging
witness testimonies that implicate Mr. Sonave. Carefully point out contradictions and seek
to establish that the witness accounts may not be as credible as initially portrayed.
8. Reference Legal Precedents: Reference legal precedents that emphasize the importance of
clear motive and the need for a complete chain of evidence in establishing guilt beyond
reasonable doubt. These references can strengthen the defense's arguments.
9. Address Humanitarian Grounds: Present Mr. Sonave's background, reputation, and lack of
criminal history as a compelling factor that contradicts the charges against him. Appeal to
the court's sense of justice and fairness in considering the case.
10. Courtroom Strategy: Prepare a well-structured courtroom strategy that succinctly presents
the defense's arguments, systematically addresses each piece of evidence, and highlights
the weaknesses in the prosecution's case.
11. Counter Prosecution's Narrative: Present an alternative narrative that challenges the
prosecution's theory of the crime. Show that the evidence is equally consistent with an
alternative scenario that does not involve Mr. Sonave's guilt.

8. OBSERVATION IF ANY :

The observation of Adv. Venkatesh Shewale's interview with Mr. Sachin Sonave is as follows:
Adv. Venkatesh Shewale conducted a structured and thorough interview with Mr. Sachin Sonave,
focusing on gathering crucial insights to form the foundation of the defense strategy. Notably, Mr.
Sonave's established rapport with Adv. Shewale due to their prior association as an old client
facilitated a comfortable and open environment during the interview.
During the interview, Adv. Shewale employed a three-step method to comprehensively
understand the case from Mr. Sonave's perspective:
Part I: Understanding the Facts and Client's Involvement Adv. Shewale began by meticulously
eliciting details about the sequence of events leading up to the murder. By actively listening and
using open-ended questions, he allowed Mr. Sonave to provide a detailed account of his
interactions with the co-accused, his presence at the crime scene, and his connection to the
deceased partners. This approach aimed at gaining a clear understanding of Mr. Sonave's
involvement and assessing potential inconsistencies.
Part II: Understanding Jurisdiction Recognizing the international jurisdiction aspect of the case,
Adv. Shewale demonstrated proactive measures by discussing his collaboration with a lawyer in
Dubai. This showcased his commitment to comprehending all legal dimensions and strategizing
accordingly. His efforts highlighted a thorough approach to addressing potential jurisdictional
complexities.
Part III: Establishing Possible Grounds Adv. Shewale engaged Mr. Sonave in a discussion to
establish possible legal grounds for the defense. This step involved analyzing the lack of motive,
 flaws in circumstantial evidence, reliance on legal precedents, and humanitarian considerations.
By collaboratively exploring these avenues, they worked toward crafting a robust defense strategy
that aligns with Mr. Sonave's perspective.
Throughout the interview, Adv. Shewale maintained a professional demeanor, adhering to ethical
responsibilities, and focusing on legal implications. His familiarity with Mr. Sonave's background
enabled him to delve directly into case-specific details, maximizing the efficiency of the interview
process. By combining a structured approach with in-depth follow-up questions, Adv. Shewale
effectively gathered valuable insights that would inform his defense strategy moving forward.

9. SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCATE

64
1. NAME OF EXAMINERS :

a)
b)

2. DATE :

3. REMARKS BY THE EXAMINERS :

DATE : (SIGNATURE OF THE EXAMINER)

(SIGNATURE OF THE EXAMINER)

79
80