Gopesh Soni - Lawyer

GOPESH SONI is unlawful lawyer and uethical Lawyer.  He served at my residence documents late evening a few hours before the Hearings next day.  ITS ILLEGAL TO GIVE OPPOSITE PARTY ELEMENT OF SURPRISE for any matter.  No ethical Lawyer does such an action.  Why was it very important to give these documents a day before when they had since 2011 to file these documents, almost more than a Year? These documents served by GOPESH SONI, contained all the fake paperwork and fake dates ( later called COE ) . So I don't get time to go to title offices and research the validity, this trick was played by another Unethical Lawyer GOPESH SONI from Gujrat India.  

PLUS JUSTICE SNOWIE GAVE, "abridgment of time for service". And most of all when Justice Snowie asked which documents in Courts, Gopesh Soni lied to her again and never replied that he just served Documents Yesterday.

For all Fake Documents filed by Gopesh SONI just few hours ago that I had no time to read and counter check the validity of its information via the Peel Title Offices.

Gopesh SONI new once an partial summary Judgement is done, it will cost Mr. SINGH, lots monies to undo the partial summary Judgement of Justice Snowie in Courts of Appeal.

Gopesh Soni, Lawyer, lied to the Peel Courts and documents that were full of lies were served to me few hours prior to the hearings.

Few lies by Indian Born Gopesh Soni, fools an Canadian born Judge very easily at Superior Courts in Ontario, Canada.  

Per the law no Lawyer can lie in submission but yet, Lawyer like Gopesh SONI, do submit fake dates, documents and information to make Judge that their story is believable. 

Judges in Canada blindly trust ONLY lawyers and these lawyers play with the trust of these Judges and fool em like a child in kindergarten class.  Few Lawyers, not only con customers but the Judges alike. 

Judges do not counter check any documents submitted by Lawyers. Well how can judges check a document submitted to the other party just last night.  Justice Snowie, gave abridgment of time for very important documents that were actually fooling the Justice and Other party served to some other member, a night before both to the courts and other party.

1. Intent to mislead via a fake documents in  “Chain of Events” ( hereafter called COE ), To make perjury more trustworthy a COE looks and sounds more correct and believable in the Superior Courts.  STEP 1:  March30th – Agreement Signed, STEP 2: April 02 – PR1622023 registered, STEP 3: April 06 – Mail sent.  In reality all three events were fake s land title in Ontario never registered the PR1622023 on the title but had rejected it.  So mail was only sent when Junaid Kayani and their lawyers had bribed an land titles lady few months down the road and sent the mail in November of 2009.
2. Mr. SONI is a very smart lawyers, he wanted to divert on the day of " Partial Summary Judgements " from payments per the contracts " , which he knew his client has not paid to totally irrelevant direction and paint a credibility picture around the Trust Agreement date and modifications.
3. Since Mr. SONI could not prove that monies were paid in full he started to bring issues about " TRUST Agreements " that were totally irrelevant.  The game was to divert the mind of Honorable Justice Snowie from real issue of Unpaid - Money to the irrelevant issues of dates and changes in Trust Agreements and Law Society Issues.
4.  If Hon.  Snowie, would have read the trust agreements ( even the one that is disputed ) she would have seen that even that disputed Trust Agreements was not followed and paid and was based on the Jan 01, 2009 contract that does not exist and the same disputed trust agreements asks Azeem to pay monthly expenses in full from which walked out.
5. In fact Hon. Justice Snowie was only shown two pages of the agreements while there were actually 8 to 10 pages.  And on most other pages " Jan 09, 2009, contract was mentioned ".

• Trust Agreement was based on the Jan 01, 2009 contracts that does not exist, and real contract of Jan 09, 2009 was never paid in full till insolvency in May 2009.
• Trust Agreement of March 30th, 2009 does asks Mr. Bhatti to pay monthly expenses that Mr. Bhatti did not pay and walked out in May of 2009. So Mr. SINGH became unpaid seller in May of 2009. Both for the Jan 09 and added agreement of His Trust Agreements 
• Trust agreements was purposefully made on a day that I did not visit the offices of the Junaid Kayani so if Mr. SINGH, says about validity of the agreements then courts will think some thing fishy.
• Courts looked at that as escape goat when Mr. SINGH, stated about reporting Mr. Kayani to the Law Society, where Mr. Kayani knew very well that his client from day one has only paid $12,200 out of which 4000 was rent and 3200 was for rental contracts and 5000 for failed purchase
• Mr. Kayani would have purposefully made agreements on another day and changed the original because of past experience as this way the person being sued will divert from the original issues not full filled in the contracts to the contract it self
• When one attacks the validity of a contract the courts take it as an trying to escape the matter.
• Stating in The Courts, that its fake gave false impression about trust that Mr. SINGH is trying to avoid the contracts.
• If Justice Snowie did read the full Trust agreements, she would have noticed that even that modified " TRUST AGREEMENTS " was not followed by Mr. Bhatti.
• But civil law is about attacking and confusing the courts, and not about truth and that is why a long hearings or mini- trials is the only way to know the truth, where the issues are not black and white.
• Mainly the Trust Agreements was tenant in common that only give 50% shares of the house for which beneficiary and trustee and the owner of the rest of the house is same person.  So 100% owner is Mr. SINGH.  A trustee can not be removed by beneficiary and there is no article in the contracts to sell the house.

Justice Snowie is a lawyers tuned into Justice and Gopesh Soni Barrister & Solicitor Brampton, Ontario, Canada