women lawyers appearing for men
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 07 December 2010
This query is : Resolved
Do women lawyers appear only for women or will they appear for men also (to obtain divorce) in family court?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 07 December 2010
does that mean women lawyers will appear against women?
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 07 December 2010
Dear Anonymous,
The lawyers appear not for male or female, but for the law point involved in the case. If your argument is to be accepted, then what the Judge should be - neither a man nor a woman?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 07 December 2010
Respected Sri Ramachandran Sir,
I agree with your case. My arguement need not be accepted.
But i assume that my thought can be shared in this forum : "FEW" lawyers who say their objective is for fighting for the rights of women for their upliftment and welfare , dont practice what they preach to the outside world.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 07 December 2010
Every advocate can have their own policy of not appearing for selective cases. It is their private decision, it is not universal.
The sex does not matter. Lawyer can appear for their clients irrespective of the sex.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 07 December 2010
Dear Anonymous,
If you have to share your thoughts then you have to do it in 'FORUM' not in experts area.
More over, unfortunately, u did not share your thoughts, but posed a question. That is why I replied accordingly.
Parthasarathi Loganathan
(Expert) 08 December 2010
Hope our learned brothers will concur that there are no provisions either in the Advocates' Act or in the BCI Regulations stipulating Male Advocates should appear for male clients or otherwise.
Parveen Kr. Aggarwal
(Expert) 08 December 2010
Family courts are constituted under the Family Courts Act, 1984. Under the statute no party can, as a matter of right, claim representation through legal practitioners (Advocates). It is only if the Family court considers it in the interests of justice it may permit appearance of legal experts.
Section 13 of the Act:
"13. Right to legal representation.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any law, no party to a suit or proceeding before a Family Court shall be entitled, as of right to be represented by a legal practitioner:
Provided that if the Family Court considers it necessary in the interest of justice, it may seek the assistance of a legal expert as amicus curiae."
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 08 December 2010
Respected Experts
Much thanks for this response.
However as a matter of fact , in reality when one of the party who has a counsel who says "i am assisting X" in front of the honorable judge, the judge apparently looks at the side of the party who is represented by the advocate and ignores the other side who appears in person.
Naturally the one who wishes to break the marriage is represented by a counsel in such a case and the one who strives hard to save the marriage is affected because of this.
Given a situation like this, how does the party who does not have a counsel but can explain all the material facts in relation to the case represent to the honorable judge to listen to him / her side of the situation.
Expecting your advise.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 08 December 2010
Dear Anonymous,
It is your decision to appear personally in your case. This you are doing after knowing that the Judges are looking at the side of the party represented by an Advocate. As a party appearing in person, it is for you to some how draw the attention of the Judge to your side of the story and convince him. THIS IS EXACTLY THE ADVOCATES APPOINTED TO REPRESENT THE PARTIES ALWAYS TRY TO DO IN THE COURTS.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 08 December 2010
Sir ,
Does this mean that Section 13 is not applied in reality??
