Pls guide for dv act case
Sidharth
(Querist) 24 December 2015
This query is : Resolved
I'm victim of false DV Act case.
I filed application u/s 21 of dv act, for visitation rights to visit minor child, She opposed in written reply. And now avoiding arguments on the ground that lawyer is no available from last 3 yrs.
Can I file application for expeditious disposal of said application. U/s 12 of DV act
The Magistrate shall endeavour to dispose of every application made under sub-section (1) within a period of sixty days from the date of its first hearing.
Guest
(Expert) 24 December 2015
yes you can file request to court for expeditious soultion
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 24 December 2015
Well, the trial court having been overburdened to deal with cases often progress slowly and there is no mechanism to expedite hearing.
However you can do so by filing application in the High court under its Revisional jurisdiction for passing directions which the high courts generally readily do.
Guest
(Expert) 24 December 2015
The DV act is for women .How come you sought the relief?Child is with you or it is with whom?
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 25 December 2015
The child must be with the mother,act as per the suggestion of Adv Barman.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 25 December 2015
Agree with the expert Devajyoti Barman.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 25 December 2015
You can not file a petition under DV Act, only women can be the aggrieved person.
Please confirm is it a real case.
Sidharth
(Querist) 25 December 2015
Strongly disagree with Adv arunagri
I never said I filed petition. I said I filed application u/s 21 of dv act
Pls first read question and act carefully
Guest
(Expert) 25 December 2015
If you want releif under matriminial laws invoke HM Act
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Hey Siddarth, don't get annoyed with the replies of sr legal experts,sometimes it could be due to over look.As a querist U have no right to abuse the legal experts.
In some of the queries u have been acting as an expert too,nothing wrong in sharing views.But we have to restrain ourselves.
Guest
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Dear querist DV act is meant only and only for relief to women in distress which comprises of all issues like child custody,maintenance for child and woman, residence order, protection form cruelty and violence, her stridhan.
You have to go to family court for your rights like custody of child and maintenance if you don't earn and your wife earns. And also for divorce.
Sidharth
(Querist) 26 December 2015
Dear Dr Rajendra k Gupta & Devalla
I have already won the argument in honorable court
On weather husband is entitled to get relief in dv act or not
On the basis of judgement of CJI
I never said that I'm a expert. I only shared my experience and knowledge
Guest
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Mr Siddharth to meet your child is your fundamental right and magistrate while passing custody order has to make some arrangement for other spouse/parent to see the child normally once a week at a convenient location
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 26 December 2015
@ Sidharth,
You are required to rein in/restrain yourself in addressing the experts who have been helping the querist FREE OF COST.
Agreed, there was "some"overlooking even then Sh. Aunragiri is an expert and a senior member of LCI "Experts" club oblidging a large section of society including yourself(who cannot afford to engage and seek expert's advise).
Congratulation for winning your arguments (case)in the Court; so you wanted to tally and reconcile your arguments with experts by posting this query, isn't it????
In order to share your experience/ knowledge/expertise you are requested to post your queries in LCI "Forum" and not "Experts"; it is just a suggestion do not mind.
Best wishes.
Guest
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Vashista sir, querist can write a nice small article and publish in article section for benefit of all including experts for his experience in court procedures.
Sidharth
(Querist) 26 December 2015
Thanks for your"not required suggestions"
But I am not self proclaimed expert like...
For your further knowledge it's not I can't afford lawyers, it's because some lawyers don't understand that if I am asking for visitation rights its obvious that child is with her mother.
And because my query is closed .Please don't bother
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Mr Sidharth, despite the suggestions of Sr legal expert Dr Vasistha,U are again comming to the starting point.Restrain UR self from going beyond UR limits when replying to the questions and suggestions of sr legal experts.
In many queries I found U have been replying and giving suggestions to the victims with half baked legal knowledge,better be alert when U R replying to a querist.
This is not a place for arguments and adamant discussions.
Sidharth
(Querist) 26 December 2015
As I said earlier SUGGESTIONS NOT REQUIRED.
Let the querist decide whose suggestions are better.
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 26 December 2015
I wish the querist the best of luck
Sidharth
(Querist) 26 December 2015
Right...
Can you please explain why some lawyers hate those who fights their own cases.
I think lawyers should appreciate those people
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 26 December 2015
My dear Sidharth!
Everybody hate persons who pick others pockets and they are lawyers when serving legal fields, doctors serving patients, engineers serving technology.
Even legislatures hate lawyers when it comes to a matrimonial cause and many more other plate forms only to let the goining''MIYAN BIBI RAJI TAB KYA JAROORAT HAI KAZI""
If you are able to address your problems on your own where is the need to come here to discuss them FOR FREE.
Am i not justified to refuse you a service?
Doing things free is one's option, not other's right.Amend to think this way.
If you dispute me I do not bother as I may not even have opportunity to see your responses for months and years.
Sidharth
(Querist) 26 December 2015
Agreed... With prabhakar singh
Guest
(Expert) 26 December 2015
Mr. Sidharth,
Thanks for sharing your experience and knowledge for the guidance of experts at LCI, as you said, "I only shared my experience and knowledge!" As you said, "you have already won the argument in honorable court," can you please reproduce here the extract of the court's verdict based on winning of your argument?
Further, with reference to your gesture that the lawyers should appreciate those people who fight their own cases. I appreciate you, if it really relates to a DV case against you and your query does not also relate to any hypothetical academic query.
But, since you have expressed strong disagreement with Adv arunagri and also stated that you have already won the argument in honorable court, CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY, whether you treat yourself as aggrieved (petitioner) or a respondent in terms of section 21 or section 12 in the said DV case?
TO BE FRANK, please don't mind, for me yours does not seem to be a real DV case. For me it is just an academic query of a law student!
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 27 December 2015
Right conclusion by Sr Advocates Prabhakar Singhji and Dhingraji
Guest
(Expert) 27 December 2015
May I request senior experts here to kindly not waste their precious time and words on this query anymore as enough advise was given to querist but he is confused.
For record and his knowledge section on child custody in DV act clearly mentions that while passing order Magistrate may consider making suitable arrangement for respondent to meet the child.
In fact as state before to him, it is his fundamental right to meet his child and no law can be made to stop that unless his meeting is dangerous to child.
Guest
(Expert) 27 December 2015
Dear Dr. Gupta,
Thanks for your sincere advice in good faith to the experts.
But, I may like to point out that the querist is not a confused one, rather he has not only tried to confuse the experts, but also tried to befool them. He poses to be more intelligent than the really experienced and practising advocates by strongly diasagreeing on the opinion of Advocate Arunagiri by stating that he has won the argument, i.e., his right of visitation of child, which any judge allows very easily to the biological father. Not only that he has boasted that he shared his experience and knowledge, naturally for the guidance of the experts from whom he wants guidance also with respect to sec.12 on the contrary. So, what is his real achievement u/s.21 when provision already exists in the section?
Had he intended to share his knowledge and experience, he was justified to post his so called experience and knowledge in the forum section for the benefit of the really needy persons/ laymen, but not in the experts section, if he had really faced any problem with reference to sec.21.
So, what he won is not significant as against his basic real question u/s.12, which states, "CAN I FILE APPLICATION for expeditious disposal of said application. U/s 12 of DV act.
So, the question arises, if he is so knowledgeable and experienced person, what compelled him to ask the extant question with reference to sec.12 from experts?
So, I have put question to him, so that the experts & myself also may get benefitted by his so called knowledge and experience to enhance their knowledge. But, he has not come forward to reply my question.
I am pretty sure that he is a law student and has tried to solve his academic query in the guise of a sufferer under DV Act. So, I think, exposure of such like persons is a must, who try to play over smart.
Guest
(Expert) 27 December 2015
Agreed Dhinagra sir. Let us close this unproductive thread now.
Guest
(Expert) 27 December 2015
Dear Dr. Gupta,
Thanks for agreeing with me.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 03 January 2016
I agree with the views of experts Mr. Prabhakar Singh and Mr. Dhingra, the author should understand.
