@target-agility I had a conflict situation once within a team. We were estimating a user story. Two developers who were of equal experience had a argument in estimation.
Developer 1: According to me estimation should be 8 story points . Justification: We need to build entire new module to implement this and it will take at least 4-5 days to implement and then some time will be required for unit testing.
Developer 2: According to me estimation should be 2 story points. Justification: We can reuse another module which has few features and can be reused for this scenario. So we doesn't require so much of effort.

This discussion continued and converted to argument mode. We were not able to have conclusion as they both were the most senior developers. As a scrum master i had to hold the further estimation session and postpone same.
As a mitigation, i had one to one connect with both the developer separately and got to know they had personal issues and more of competition. So the discussion went on argument mode from discussion. Now in order to resolve the conflict my next course of action was to involve a senior solution architect. I explained the context to him and he was part of next estimation discussions. He consider both the developer points and gave a justification both the developers are correct at their place but the estimation should be in middle about 5 story points which included reusuablity of few of the classes from existing module plus additional development and unit testing. Since both the developers knew the architect credibility so we concluded with this final discussion and both agreed on same.
In this way team moral was not impacted. Solution architect also gave few guidelines from architecture point of view which helped developers to consider it and next time improve productivity by less time in estimation.