the judgement is very important on the point that is the holder of POA be allowed to cross examination .l think this restriction is extremely legal and valid in terms of acute observations of hon'ble high court.
can any body be allowed to practice doctor's working by way of POA? definitely not.
It is good article but monopoly of any profession cannot be accepted and people must have some alternative specially for those who cant defend themselves cant hire advocate or don't trust some one , and some close Friend who is educated enough and well versed with back ground of matter agrees to represent the litigant. This can be done through POA. In any case advocates too represent as POA. But for general quality purpose being experts advocates are only allowed. But there are many who may not have licence to practice as they may not be interested to earn livelihood through this profession. Outside advocates there are large number of brilliant persons available, Though we have have given monopoly to advocates they are organised in union type system have least accountability and even their association are self managed without outside experts on disciplinary committee hence very little action is seen in some exception published cases.hence supreme court order is balanced and justified
It is not exactly correct .There is a clause in advocates act for allowing other person with permission of court to also argue on behalf of litigant within prescribed conditions. This should be relaxed now as any one getting any monopoly tends to form union and exploit. It is for litigant to decide whom to depute. A POA should also be allowed who is well mannered and highly executed and related to or close associate (colleague in office , relative business partner or associate related by blood or marriage or class mate and person having high qualifications like masters and PhD and well versed with case and background of litigant provided they dont charge any money except papers preparation and court expenses no fees.. Monopoly of all lobbies have to be broken to stimulate competition and to improve quality. I have seen very duffer type advocates in courts and brilliant too. many do illegal acts and misinform clients dont go on date .There should be criminal provisions for such persons. no one is above law and crpc. In short a well qualified well versed person close with litigant and not charging any fees should be allowed. We have already written to law commission and minister of law for needful to be considered. In country there should not be monopoly and when such licences are involved strict conditions for professional behavior high punishment should be provided too. BCI say 90 thousand lawyers (advocates) are fake .why these are not been removed. The general conduct of advocates is not good in India except for less than 50% of good lawyers .Even honble supreme court has made so many times adverse observations about advocates conduct.
But isn't this in stark contrast to the observation by a bench of the supreme Court in Harishankar Rastogi vs Girdhari Sharma And Anr by the Hon’ble Krishna Iyer V R, which is as follows ;
" Therefore,. I think it right to give the party, who appears to be unable to represent his own case, an opportunity to present his grievance through, his friend. That friend, judging by the note prepared and put in, seems to be familiar with law, although quacks can prove fatal friends. I grant the petitioner permission to be represented by a private person as prayed for, with the condition that if this latter proves unworthy, the permission will be withdrawn."
A great endurance taken to project all the information contained in the Laws and Rules and judicial pronouncements... Good Article
You need to be
logged in to post comment
You can also submit your article by sending to firstname.lastname@example.org
view more »
Our Network Sites
Join LAWyersclubindia.com and Share your Knowledge. Registered members get a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc.