Mulkh Raj Mehta

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The respondent, admitted in 1992 and indefinitely suspended since 25 April 2002, undertook conveyancing work at a sole practitioner's firm during the principal's holiday without Law Society consent. He gave misleading statements to the Law Society's Forensic Investigation Officer (introducing himself under a false name, falsely claiming a local solicitor had provided supervision, and falsely claiming the principal's sister had signed correspondence) and failed to reply to subsequent correspondence. The Tribunal found all allegations substantiated. Given his disciplinary history (a 1996 fine and the 2002 indefinite suspension for misuse of client funds) and the seriousness of the conduct, he was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £6,821.81. Although allegation 3 referred to acting deceitfully, the Tribunal's decision did not contain an express finding of dishonesty.

Duties found breached:

• Hold a current practising certificate
• Honesty
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper communication with the court
• Not misrepresent regulated status

Aggravating factors:

• Deliberately chose to ignore restrictions of which he was clearly aware
• Caused another solicitor to breach section 42 of the Solicitors Act 1974
• Second prior appearance before the Tribunal / poor disciplinary history
• Gave misleading statements to the Forensic Investigation Officer including using a false name