No Need of Advocates at All for Justice !!!

Dear Madhu, your mot welcome. We are the rulers of our democratic India so don't mind ANY dictators, they are masquitoes.....  I have noted all your tasks and our work out is going on. 

“Litigants are the cornerstones of the judiciary. A litigant is the ‘Heart’ of the judicial system. Every effort should be made to provide him quick justice at low cost. Due respect should be given to him.”

“As the entire judiciary is thriving on litigants, if the faith in the judiciary is eroded in their minds, the judicial system will collapse”

 – said by former CJ of Hon. Patna High Court J N Bhatt.

No offence madhu , just carry on the thread decently since whatever you or others do legal system can not work without advocates though they are blamed for all the ills of the system.

This is originally posted by lnd. Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar ithe thread-

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Malacious-Prosecution-in-India-1370.asp

Cutting Costs of litigation - e-filing of Petitions, written arguments, and such others shall be put in vogue may cut costs of visit by lawyers to courts. Allotment of new case Numbers may be emailed to the advocate's mail i.d.

What came first ? Crime or law ? Who is to decide who should be defended ? Will it be proper to leave someone  alone and defenceless at at the mercy  of law ?What should be the proportion of punishment ? Who will do this balancing act without present system ? Can we have a 100% law abiding society  where threre will be no crime and hence no law and hence no lawyers ? The system being a corss section of the Society, represents what it belongs to. The routes are interwoven and difficult to seperate from each other.  We have to decide from where to begin. Any surfacive treatment will fail.

Yes sir, Of fcourse these measure should be taken, not only that rather heftty court fees for filing title suit or any other too should be brought. Advocate fees is justified becoz they are in proffession also they do not get salary, pension and other benefit which govt. servants enjoy.

The more painful thing is that in spite of repeated observations of Ho. SC and other HCs, concerned authorities do pay any attention. It is a pure contempt of not only to court rather of constitution also.

Please go thro’ the following remarks of Apex Court had appeared in the news under heading Lynching shows loss of faith in courts:SC –

Some persons entered into a village at Vaishali Dist. Of Bihar with a motive to commit theft. But the villagers caught and lynched them all on spot.

Reacting on this news/incident Hon. SC observed that “this shocking act of lynching of suspected thieves is the result of the erosion of their faith in the ability of the courts to render speedy justice.” While deciding a civil dispute that was first filed in 1947 – the year India got Independence – a bench of Justice A K Mathur and Markandey Katju observed that massive delay in disposal of cases was eroding public faith in the courts and warned that unless the situation was addressed on a war footing by the authorities concerned it would soon go out of control.”We saw in the media news of lynching of suspected thieves into a village at Vaishali Dist. Of Bihar, the gunning down of an under trial prisoner outside Patna civil court and other incidents where people have taken the law into their own hands” the bench said.

          “This is obviously because many people have started thinking that justice will not be done in courts due to delay in court proceedings”

“This is indeed alarming state of affair and we once again request the authorities to do the needful in the matter urgently before the situation goes out of control.” The bench said, they also said that this is not first case they were coming across pending in courts for years, frustrating the litigants and causing them anguish.

          “Recently in a case decided on 23Aug 2007 Rajinder Singh(Dead) vs. Prem Mai and ors – we had expressed our deep anguish about this situation and had observed that because of delay in disposal of cases, people of this country are fast losing their faith in the judiciary” it said.

“Still they are waiting… But for what? Whether all these amounts to justice?”

We are not saying that there should be no law and lawyer at all. Advocates should be only for outside court room consultation. But the cases should be decided by the Expert panel after filling the suit. If it is goes against the interest of any he may after consulting advocates can go for appeal. In ancient time justice system was very good. The disputes were been settled on the spot by delivering justice by the courtiers of the King or Emperor.

I fully support the observations of the lady. I have never read or heard that a pleader went to Vikramaditya, Jehangir/Ashoka/Askbar/Nizam to plead the case.By the way what was the qualification prescribed for a pleader in those days? No Bar Council? No Law College?

mr boda

What came first ? Crime or law ?

obviously crime. law lags the crime.

on the otherhand, we can say - crime leads the law

Dear friends, it is really good going on this topic looking the participation of LCI members.

At this stage I may please be allow to refresh the task on which I have insisting approach;

Sorry for repeatation but please keep in vie the following, I request;

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/SHOULD-ADVOCACY-BE-A-PUBLIC-SERVICE--20251.asp   (I want it)

SHOULD ADVOCACY BE A PUBLIC SERVICE ?

In the cases which are filed by the Government it should be the responsibility of the Government to provide legal aid / service to all against whom it has filed the cases. 

In the cases wherein the Government is not a party the responsibility to provide defence Lawyer / Advocate to the opposition should be lied upon the claimant and finally upon the looser.

BUT, the Advocate / Legal aid should be provided by the Government.

The Advocates / Lawyer should be under PUBLIC SERVICE registered with the Government on the basis of some PAYMENT OF WAGES REGULATION alike.

The citizens should apply to Government to provide an Advocate / Legal Aid and accordingly should deposit the wages to the Government and the Advocate / Lawyer should be paid by the Government. 

NO DIRECT TRANSACTION SHOULD BE BETWEEN ADVOCATE / LAWYER AS THE PUBLIC SERVANT.  NO PRIVATE ADVOCATE SHOULD BE ALLOWED OFFICIALLY TO BE APPEAR BEFORE COURT.

ONLY, In the Business Matters the Private Advocate should be allowed, however, there should be some regulation for transactions through public service.

PAYER SHOULD BE THE MASTER AND SERVER SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE LEGALLY.

***

Alright sirji

when are you paying this month wage sir ji

WOW!!  Got it !!!

Well done Mr. Satyanarayana..  I actually wanted this reply from some Advocate...

You immediately asked that : "When are you paying this month's wages?"

You did not ask that : "Since when I start at work???"

This is the attitude I and Mr. Madhu wanted to underline and you helped us, so thanks.

ne is that;

Neither,

you have gone through the draft properly as to what exactly written there by me

nor,

you have prepared your reply properly and just become to catch the monitory benefits only

and these are the happenings going on in most of the cases AND IT IS ONLY VERY UNFORTUNATE IN THE PROFESSION OF ADVOCACY that all kinds of people are entered in this nobel profession who have no such attitude accordingly nor the required efficiency and only got the degree of LLB to make money by exploitation of innocent people.  Similiarly most of the people getting the degree of MBBS to make money and innocent peoples peoples are going died/killed by Doctors.  It is not at all a joke only on advocates it is a NUDE TRUTH ;

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/A-SAD-JOKE-ON-ADVOCATORY-20109.asp

TAREEKH PE TREEKH.. TAREEKH PE TAREEKH.. TAREEKH PE TAREEKH.........

DATES... AND DATES.... AND DATES.. AND DATES...

APPEALS. AND APPEALS.... AND APPEALS... AND APPEALS......

WHERE IS JUSTICE GONE?????????

JUSTICE IS KIDNAPPED BY THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THE JUDICIARY IS SURROUNDED BY THIS KIND OF ADVOCATES (?).

Please don't make fun of lawyers, it's a bad practice. It is open to clients for fee bargaining or even a one time fees structure payment. Advance and Balance (before Arguments commence). But some clients opt to pay monthly fees if they are salaried persons. I don't find any other professional other than lawyers who adjust to the client's circumstances. May be Mr.Satyanarayana's clients are more of monthly salary type, so he claimed like that. If the entire society is living on something or the other and they are paid without demur, why do people generally want free services from a lawyer? Do lawyers get free rice, free wheat, free electricity, free education for their children, rent-free accommodation? Clients generally discuss all their problems and get their advices smilingly for about half-an-hour to one-hour, but when a lawyer asks his fees, their faces turn pale immediately (of course a lot of exceptional persons are also there, I don't deny). Let the Government gives some concessions to lawyers in leading their life, then your criticising about over-charging by a lawyer will be justified.