Seeking mutual concert divorce

Senior Partner

Where is an example that a lawyer referred by a wife is a trustworthy lawyer?
Rejoinder: There are thousands of decided Mutual Consent Divorce cases from Judgment list of District Court websites where for 'practical' reasons only one advocate appeared as 'common' advocate of parties. It is not a norm, it is not binding, it is just a choice based on TRUST made by parties. 

 

XXX Or why a man, who is not in a mental asylum, should ask his wife to refer a lawyer when he needs to divorce her?
Rejoinder: Here in this brief both parties decided that they need divorce VIA MUTUAL CONSENT DIVORCE ROUTE and not that only he (i.e. queriest) needs a divorce. Read carefully brief then argue further with me. 

 

XXXXIf this is the same kind of behaviour u exhibit in the courtroom, ur client will hang on the next available noose.
Rejoinder: So far it has never happened as 'first' replies are rock solid based on 'first cut i.e. first statement of a queriest' reading a brief in FREE LEGAL PORTALS. For more replies the moment a queriest opens up with more facts one should pay FEES. Hence 'last reply' is norm in providing FREE service which I have adopted and anyone else is free to go on giving further replies. Let me educate you further, in case you are not aware that 'free legal advice' is given for free only upto certain time limit based on reading down 'first cut' statement - question of a queriest and post that it ought to get converted into 'paid' reply. That free service time limit in free forums such as this by me is copyrighted as I often mention after reply in bold 'last reply', if you or any queriest have problem or like to hear more wisdom then PAY and hear them out.  I'm aware of giving 'first cut' reply without seeking more facts i.e. my reply may be construed as probably wrong but if one pays attention to "what initially"  as first brief is asked and what I replied then till that point the reply is correct and the moment a queriest puts 'more facts' and readers start re-reading my 'first cut reply' then may be my reply may not sound correct but whose mistake is it? It is queriest as he ought to have given all facts when posting first time knowing full that this is a 'free' reply forum. Understand the replies made by me against this backdrop then you will take back your above quote - XXXXIf this is the same kind of behaviour u exhibit in the courtroom, ur client will hang on the next available noose  unquote



u have yet to produce a one shred of evidence to support ur argument. U asked me to help u gather the evidence and ur request was denied without consideration.
Rejoinder: Read various decided Judgments from District Court websites  you will find thousands of cases of parties where for 'practical' reasons only one advocate appeared as 'common' advocate of parties and these judgments are not of HC or SC. Whereas I didnot seek your help, instead I asked you to produce those cases where separate - independent Advocate of one among two spouses 'colluded' which brings out ‘natural justice’ difference in what you say as ‘insanity’ comment Vs. TRUST said by other replier. Unless Trust not there when both have decided to opt for mutual consent divorce even with having separate advocates it may FAIL, mostly, due to ‘collusion’ is what I am grilling you in case you donot know art of crossing ‘last mile’ journey. 

 

Thirdly........XXXX
Rejoinder: I didnot ask you to boost your employability or un-employability status, save those in your pockets for sunshine or rainy days.

 

U said ‘law is not humor’.  Sir, law becomes humor when u often talk of ‘last reply.’ I always say to myself, “last reply? He doesn’t seem that old; I hope he lives and posts another reply.”
Rejoinder: General public like you when pop up in FREE legal forums of Advocate's interaction with General Public then as FREE service 'last reply' is option and I do take up several next post of several new queriest and give FREE 'last reply' respectively instead of romancing only one post till eternity and have been replying as per my FREE time. If you being general public has problem with my 'last reply' then move ahead to PAID service and empty your pockets you will get case lifetime paid service. Don't take free service as your birth rights by poking faulty challenges. 

 

I was looking for a worthy fight so I could deliver a knock-out punch. To my dismay, u did not bring any fight in u. Next time: make sense. The argument u presented here is no different than ur last reply: so what do u want me to reply to?
Rejoinder: I want you to 'differentiate' 'sanity' vs. 'trust' when both spouses wants divorce via mutual consent route and may have one common advocate (provided by either spouse to other) if not possible to have two separate once due to practical reasons. When common advocate appeared in mutual consent divorce cases those cases didnot end up in 'insanity' route. It is a choice not norm nor is binding and simply rejecting it does not hold waters since it is happening in thousands of MCD cases even today.    

 

PS:
I didnot die or was dying OR asked you to read my various 'last replies' in the Free Legal Forum, it is you who sent me PM commenting my replies are 'humorous' and you said in your own PM you are informing www.498a.org to refer to my various alleged to be 'last replies' posting whereas I donot even needed to go to such Forums. Thanks but no thanks for free publicity which does not even interest me. 

 

Problem here is general public becoming over smart especially NRI's and commenting about Indian Advocate(s) replies in this forum as if general public knows Laws better than Indian Advocates and funny part is they themselves cannot even reply legally mentioning procedures, acts, codes, sections etc. after an advocate's reply, yet have tenacity to comment Indian Advocates are 'fools' or give 'bad replies' or 'donot know law' yet their tail itself is caught by their Indian wives or is struck – slow moving in some or the other Indian Court. You generic public are good at making fun of law or legal replies nothing more as you have no iota of knowledge or practice of procedures, acts, codes, sections etc. had it not been so you could have found yourself reading decided citations where one common advocate provided his services for mutual consent divorce instead of asking me to give them as evidence on a platter. 

 

Now, let me tell you a last eGyan; even if separate advocate hired there are number of cases post decree in mutual consent divorce where wife has re-opened cases and after decree in MCD court gave further relief to divorced wife. So what happened to what intern Shonee hinted about 'Trust' and your faulty comment on Indian advocate's 'insanity' in such re-opened cases where separate advocates were hired? This much you may not know but poke up here challenging Advocates wisdom and calling Advocates replies as 'humor'! 

 

Keep talking more I have patience to hear all sorts of general public's like you unlike your faulty quote 'denying request without consideration'. I give earful of 'consideration' as I want to remain within Law and not above Law as over smart public like you aspire to with faulty engagements.

 
Reply   
 
Financial Examiner

Sir Tajobsindia, u talk a lot, like a housemaid, but u do not produce any evidence to support ur case. The court, where u fight ur cases, must be imaginary where evidence is optional. To call u a housemaid or a politician is a mere difference of opinion. I will prefer to call u a politician because I’m intelligent enough to spot a person who’s arguing without any supporting evidence, to ricochet a valid question.
 
I hate doing this, it’s repetitive: plssssssssssssssssss provide evidence to support ur case. Or else, even HC will not entertain ur appeal because u r being given more than enough opportunity here to present some evidence.
 
Advocate, provide evidence of a man, who is not admitted into a mental asylum, who asked his wife to provide an attorney to get a divorce from her.
 
Sir, u will be guilty of contempt of court, if, in ur next appearance, u do not present any evidence to support ur case. The court will also STRIKE OFF ur defence. Pls present some evidence to support ur babble.
 
In the interest of justice, the court is again adjourned until the defence lawyer gets his act together.  
 
Reply   
 


Financial Examiner

Dear Tajobsindia, last night, while I wrote the last two replies in this thread, I was somewhat under the influence of alcohol: I did not mean to call u a housemaid. And I do not think ur replies r babbles. Please accept my apology.

 

But Sir, u should learn to acknowledge ur blunders and correct them in the future: u made a huge error in judgement when u recommended that, to work out an MCD, an NRI husband should hire a divorce-lawyer referred by his wife. I quote ur recommendation: “direct your wife to assist in search of a local advocate found via reference.”

 

Sir, u did not look after the interest of the author while providing ur advice. To the contrary, u provided advice, which will most likely result in satisfying his wife’s interests.

 

I welcome u to continue this argument. I have no doubt in my mind that u r wrong. If u r not satisfied with the reasoning given so far, u will be provided more argument and evidence to change ur mind. So that, in the future, u r prevented from pushing another NRI into the harm’s way.

 
Reply   
 
Financial Examiner

Sir Tajobsindia, here is ur another blunder:
 
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/498a-after-remarriage-111472.asp
 
U offered wrong advice and false assurance to the author who posed the question in the above link. U said 498a cannot be filed after the divorce decree. Here is ur quote, "No after divorce from first husband she cannot file." 
 
Sir, how do u justify that 498a cannot be filed after the divorce decree? 
 
If a public servant committed an offence that falls under IPC 166(IPC 166: Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person) and the public servant resigns from his post after committing the offense, will he get immunity from the charges? Of course he will not. The thing that will prevent him from being charged is the limitation period mentioned in the Crpc 468. But by ur reasoning, as u reasoned in the link above, he would somehow get immunity if he is no longer a public servant.
 
If u still don't get it, let me explain it to u like I would to a 10 year old: imagine there's a law called 998a which states: any shopkeeper who hits his customer will be imprisoned for 1 year. Now one day a shopkeeper hits his customer, and a few days later, he sells his shop and starts farming. Just because he changed his profession from a shopkeeper to a farmer, will it give him immunity from being charged for an offense that was committed while he was a shopkeeper? No. As long as the charges fall under the limitation period, he does not have immunity.
 
Sir, to increase ur knowledge, know that the section 498a is bound by the limitation period, not by a divorce decree. A divorce decree will not come in the way of justice being served for an offense committed under 498a. As mentioned in the link below, even the limitation period can be extended by applying Crpc 473: 
http://spuwac.com/what-is-498a-i-p-c/
 
An HC quash, of a 498a filed after a divorce decree, will be due to lack of evidence or due to expiration of limitation period. Not because the husband managed to change his title.
 
Once someone points it out with evidence, learn to acknowledge ur error. Do not live in ignorance. More importantly: do not give out harmful advice.

Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
Financial Examiner

Sir Tajobsindia, I hope u r clear that u r never to suggest to an NRI that he should ask his wife to recommend a divorce-lawyer to him.

 

Also, u said, "as if general public knows Laws better than Indian Advocates and funny part is they themselves cannot even reply legally mentioning procedures, acts, codes, sections etc."

 

Nothing bothers me more than a proud educated man who flaunts his degree to support his argument. Will flaunting ur degree, in front of a judge, win u a lost case in the courtroom?

 

If u r not clear that u r not to offer such advice to an NRI, let me know. I'll use all of my sense to remove the fog from ur logical thinking.

 
Reply   
 

Dear All ,

First , Thanks all for your suggestions  .I understand  that every one are experts with their own experiences , so definitely this would rise to  conflict of thoughts but i feel this forum has become a bit of extensive battle ground :) or might be i am not used to this sort of discussion .For a very novice person atleast like me who has no clue about Judiciary system will land up in scratching head in picking right things .

Option 2 : Video Conferencing .

I goggled and i have got some information 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/mumbai/couples-need-not-attend-court-in-mutual-divorce-hearings/article1-834637.aspx

If i understand rightly , i can participate in mutual divorce through video conferencing(myself in USA) and my local lawyer(Bangalore) as my representative in court .Say , if i apply in Dec 2014 later i can come after 6 months say June 2015 directly to India for Final hearing . Is my understanding right ?

Option 1 : 

What is this POA route ?

 

PS :

I would be hiring my own lawyer assisted by my friend .My wife's family are from the judicial system her own  uncle  himself is a lawyer .Initially , i thought ,  lets him take the charge of mine as well but my friend's  advised not to go and i was not completely comfortable as well with this thought so i decided to hire my own lawyer .Yes , indeed there are few cases which has common lawyer but i feeli will ot fall under such case ,

 i am working in an IT firm . One side my client is on top of my head leaving no breathing space to goggle or ponder on other  things  and the other side my wife is in good gush for mutual divorce .

i resorted to this forum to find right way and then plan my trip (2 weeks) .

 
Reply   
 
Financial Examiner

Brother, POA is power of attorney.

 

The rest was explained by Tajobsindia to u in his original reply to ur query. I think it's time u discuss ur options with a lawyer in ur district back-home so that u get the information that is relevant to the court u r applying the divorce at. Even before u pick a lawyer, ask ur friend in India to let u talk to a few lawyers he trusts; let ur friend pay each lawyer a small consultation fee and u, over the phone, discuss with the lawyers, extensively, what options u have. Whoever makes most sense to u, pick him.

 

U said, "if i apply in Dec 2014 later i can come after 6 months say June 2015 directly to India for Final hearing." Brother, if the court in India, where u r applying, have provisions as mentioned in the quote below, u may not need to come to India:

 

"Divorce by mutual consent by power of attorney & video conference: Some states like Delhi allow statement of one party to be recorded through power of attorney. Some Courts along with power of attorney also conduct video conferencing for Mutual Consent Divorce. This process is quite useful and advisable in case party or parties living outside India. Thus, for Divorce by Mutual Consent for NRI is possible without physical presence. It saves time, energy and money."

Reference for the quote is below in the link; I wish the source was more reliable; I'm not at all recommending this law firm; I saw the same above quote on the websites of three different law firms; two of these law firms might be guilty of intellectual-property theft:

http://www.divorcelawyers.co.in/area-of-practice/mutual-consent-divorce/

 

Lastly, u wrote:

"Yes , indeed there are few cases which has common lawyer but i feeli will ot fall under such case"

My opponent in his argument was also suggesting that I should look up cases where one lawyer appeared for an MCD. What I don't understand is this: how will that be an example of a husband who asked his wife to provide a lawyer? All it means is that 'a' lawyer appeared on 'their' behalf. I wanted my opponent to give me an example I wanted. So that I could have had the opportunity to dissect that example to the core. I wanted some material to work with and I didn't get any.

 

There is nothing wrong with having just ‘one’ lawyer in an MCD as long as the lawyer is YOUR lawyer who is NOT RECOMMENDED BY UR WIFE. 

 
Reply   
 
Financial Examiner

Just want to add: if her uncle’s a lawsmith, it means, they know all the dowry laws to ensnarl u. So pls record all their calls and try to make them say that u have not taken or demanded dowry, no cruelty occurred, u kept her happy etc. Keep all recordings on the original device and in the original file. The copies r not admissible in the court. Do a lot of recordings on a few different devices and keep them safe. Any money spent on the devices is worth the cost. Think of it as a payment for an insurance policy. Your inlaws themselves might have also taken out an insurance policy of their own: so pls be careful of what u say in ur phone conversations.

 

And u said,I understand  that every one are experts with their own experiences , so definitely this would rise to  conflict of thoughts. Trust me brother, it was no expertise or their experience which made them suggest to u that u should ask ur wife to refer to u a divorce-lawyer. It was pure insanity that offered such a risky suggestion. Please do not insult my intellect, and my ability to judge, by claiming that expertise or experience were visible anywhere in their suggestion. U wrote this query to ask them to guide u to ur destination and they pointed towards a road where the bandits r well known for ambushing travelers.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

Search Forum:








×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu