LAWYERS NOT ALLOWED IN FAMILY COURT CHENNAI

Lawyers are not representing their clients in the sense that the petitioner and respondent both needs to be present there at the court. However, they do accompany them and speak on behalf of them. As well, they also seek adjournment on behalf of their clients. 

Read my article posted on 10 November 2010 on the above subject and comment in the light of statutory provisions.

local body of lawyers, as -bar association       can play a super role in this matter !

Wait madam.....

1. The circular is crystal clear about TAKING UP CASES (timing wise) of both types of representations and does not spell out the actual nature of S. 13 FCA to begin with? So title of the post is eye catcher but putting on reading glasses and reading down the circular leaves different taste ji !


2. Kindly re-read S. 13 R/w S. 9 and S. 10 FCA clearly mentioned in context in referred circular.


However, the actual spirit of S. 13 FCA has been lost just because of Bar Association and several unable litigants education on beauty and nature of establishing from time to time F/C in any District.


BTW, I will post later tonight why S. 13 FCA is not mandatory but discretionary for your ladyship to understand the root cause of such anomalies and reason why functioning of Family Courts are now-a-days highly criticized by larger public.

As per sectioin 13 of the Family courts act the represention through the lawyer is not normally perimitted.  In order to meet the ends of justice and inability to represent the case  and in the interest of justice the legal practitioners can get permission under section 13 by filing separate petition to represent a case in family court. 

In Salem or coimbatore cours there is no such special order has been issued.  Inorder to distill the improper representations such instructions has been issued in the interest of parties.

In other courts where there is no family court this situation doesn't arise

In tamil nadu number of law colleges are opened without any infrasturture. But when ever an act is enacted definitly there will be a clause that " Civil court has no jurisdiction" and another clause " legal practioners not to appear".

Then what the lawyers are for.

Does it mean all legal practioners are mal practicising, Then why law colleges and courts.

Let there be "Katta panjayat" with dhadhas and kundas to decide all disputes.

In tamil nadu number of law colleges are opened without any infrastructure. But when ever an act is enacted definitely there will be a clause that " Civil court has no jurisdiction" and another clause " legal practitioners not to appear".

Then what the lawyers are for.

Does it mean all legal practitioners are mal practicing, Then why law colleges and courts.

Let there be "Katta panjayat" with dhadhas and kundas to decide all disputes.

lawyers provoke and flareup family matters. they have  financial interest in flaring up matters. family matters shud not be allowed to become puppet in hands of lawyers, they better continue defending KASABS  like they are doing now. we dont need them for family matters.

mr naresh dubey , will u please give link to article reffered to above by you

Thanks to avnish ji for raising such a controvertial issue boldly......but lawyers can definitely help ...only thing is that parties also need not lose common sence and have a rational view.

In family court cases, If someone thinks that they have won by using tactics then it is a temporary jubiliation.....

Thanks to Dubey ji for the article. It's really value adding.......

Manjit ji ..here is the link of what Dubey ji wrote ..

 https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Representaion-of-party-by-Legal-Practitioner-in-Family-Courts-3285.asp

May I take references from Report71 (which was published way back in 1978, the same report even though rejected way back,  is again being used in IRBM Bill, ongoing in 2010!!!!!) 

on page 14, section 4.2 which says something like below......

 'some' of the laywers, representing their clients in matrimonial dispute, behave like scavengers!!!!

Please..........................These are not my words or views .............but law commisions views that too made in 1978.

I could only hope that!!!............. things could have been improved by 2010....and also by and large it did manage to improve .......................but except the 'lengthy trial' that gets stretched for years in almost every case...............hence conclusion of a case within six months has become a fiction...

A suggestion...if above thing is improved,..................  more and more people would be interested to seek justice................... which otherwise people are shying away not because whether they would get the justice or not!!!!.............. but rather because whether they would get the justice in time or not !!!!!!!!!

where there is no business? it is every where? merely because one lawyer is like that, it doesn't mean the entire world is  like that. Every where there is good and bad. A good lawyer will really help and guide in matrimonial matter better than doing it personally because general public are not law knowing and they should be guided because they are in a judicial forum and they can only be guided by a true lawyer.

ok, wat is percentage of good ones and bad ones?

@Srinivan ji,

I am amongst of those who has a keen interest in the legal domain.

Let's we all be very frank out here....

Are there even 5% of matrimonial cases which got concluded within 12 months? (ignore mandate of 6 months...lets double it our own!!) after commencement of case/first appearance in court (one may count even MCD cases also in it) in last two decades anywhere in India?

Even adding MCD cases into it, I wonder if can reach to 5%. 

Your words: where there is no business?

It's everywhere...no doubt...

Even in medical profession...some people have commercial interests/business.......but by and large around 50%...deliver the objectives as a quality service in time and economically...

I am not expecting 50% in our case of legal domain...but it should at least reach to double figures!!!

At least one in every ten should get the speedy justice!