Integrity of lawyers

Also, @JSDN, 

Are you sure you are really a "Senior advocate upto highest level"? You cannot comprehend and answer direct and simple questions! As I already said we are willing to pay money (and have done so too many times anyway!) but which Lawyer gives receipts or takes payment by checque or online transfer. They simply refuse to take payment in anyway which has a proof of payment done to him. THIS IS CLEARLY DONE TO EVADE TAX. WHY ARE YOU NOT REPLYING TO THAT - even after asking the same question 3 times? 

Now how are clients creating "minor minor" hassles in that? And what trust you talk about? A lawyer who denies taking fees in any provable form, is cheating the country and its government. So this is our first experience with a lawyer - he is a cheater, a 'tax chor'. 

Of course, fighting our own case is the BEST way, but only if everybody had the time and resources to study law leaving their current jobs. There are thousands of professions in India, most of them will give you receipts of what they charge. Doctors don't say "I won't give you receipt, do your own bypass surgery if you want. " It is only the lawyers who are the most immoral professionals in the country, after policemen. 

And the reason of taking all money in advance is NOT that the client will run away without paying money. That rarely happens. It is so that win or lose, they have already got their money. After that, they can freely get MORE MONEY from the opposite party lawyer to make your case weak - and the poor unknowing client will still trust you like God. The clients are so scared of talking in front of the lawyer even on their injustice, because they are afraid the lawyer will harm your own case if you say anything to him. 

please try improving this draft bill which a client should demand from their lawyers

I solemnly swear that I’m an advocate/lawyer with the name mr/mrs/ms…………. of ............... bar council bearing the bar council id..................Having legal offices in the following addresses……………..residing in …………………..I do hereby acknowledge that in sound mind I’ve received a sum of ……………………… as payment from mr/mrs…………….. s/o,d/o,w/o…………for providing services of…………………. Using cases…………………. To achieve the objectives desired by my client…………..to be disposed of in a minimum time of…………………... I also affirm that received sum covered all applicable taxes and other spending necessary to discharge the services I promised.

If you are right the truth will prevail, it may take time so you do not need any body to plead on your behalf.So why bother for good or bad advocate.

You need an advocate since=

1) You want him to plead your case in lhe legal forums to take advantage of this or that provisions since you are legally wrong.

2) The second reason for hiring an advocate is that other side has engaged an advocate which you feel will plead for  opposite side in effective manner and even the other side is  wrong will take the case against you.

So in such cases the problems stated above occure and for that there is no solution what ever you do.

I would rather classify litigants into four broad groups:

1. Legally ingorant

2. Legally literate but cant' represent themselves.

3. Legally literate and Capable but don't have time to spare since the judicial system has no respect for citizen's time

4. Legally literate and Capable and has the time to spare

I belong to #3 above.

Raj

Since you are aware of legal provisions  so to remain a legal citizen and take precautions and you will not need any advocate.

Ha ha ha ... I am sure everyone reading this will recognize HOW GREAT (UPTO HIGHEST LEVEL :P ) of an advocate JSDN is - who avoids a direct question even after being asked 4 times and keeps talking other crap ! 

The problem is, only these kind of people are ruling the law. Imagine this person to become a judge some day - how will he give judgements when he doesn't understand clear and simple arguments? 

- What you mentioned in points 1 to 4 is correct. Most of the lawyers use these tactics to earn money. Since Nov 93 I am fighting for a divorce case. My experience is almost similar.

Reg point 5, I feel lawyers and judges not ignorant about the   said point, but might be they try to full their client/ party.

- " NONE of them is honest." - It is wrong impression. Many of them of them may dishonest. But I experienced, few of them are honest also.

Yes money transaction might be there, as the whole thing happened under curtain, it is absolutely impossible to bring these in daylight.

What anna and mr prasant bhushan says are correct. Heavy corruption is there. Now system is so worst that people automatically believe, without going through the merits of the

charges. Honest lawyers and judges suffer for it.

"they were completely unaware of this thing" - in some cases it is true.

"'jugaad' or 'setting' which they do. " a very common fact in legal field.

"Are aisa nahi hota hai"

"humko kaanoon mat sikhao"

"Aisa hi hai to aap apna case khud hi lad lo"

All these are due to receive full payment from you. Now his strategy is to get rid from the client. If you pay day to day basis they will be very carefull to you.

"apna case khud lad lo" - yes, I am one of them. The reason is, as you mentoioned.

"In cases when the case get spoiled start blaming the legal fretanity." - When the person fights for his own, how legal fretarnity responsible for it? Simply an imagination.

" That's why we are not developing and they are" -please do not say in this manner. That may huet many. You may have genuine complains. Problem is in general. We have to find legal and logical solutions of it.

"I give them 1/3rd of the fee for the drafting, 1/3rd upon notices sent and 1/3rd upon final arguments" - a govt system is there. They pay part by part. We should follow it.

"cultural re-orientation required so that people's self respect and dignity are recognized by these service providers" - yes this job should be done by one another anna.

"Most judges never wanted to hear from parties" - wrong impression. They are bound to hear and normally they hear.

" In criminal court they mostly do not allow citizens to have a seat there while they let lawyers go in and out even if they have no cases with that court" - wrong impression. In India civil and criminal courts are open court. General public allowed to seat there to here the proceedings. On petition of any party, provision of secret hearing is there. That is called 'in camera'. There nobody allowed except the pleaders of the parties.

" But you do not want to pay his expanses and fees which will natuarlly be more. So you choose a novice and these problems occur." - these are not facts. Costly lawyers also do the professional misbehaviours as alleged. My practical experience is that, some novice lawyers give better result, if they get chance.

" they still want to loot" - yes true. But not are equally greedy.

" you want good advocate but do not want to pay  than create minor minor hassales" - mr jsdn has no other logic.

"credit card system also acts as proof" - yes true. In india a/c payee cheque may use for it.

" THIS IS CLEARLY DONE TO EVADE TAX. WHY ARE YOU NOT REPLYING TO THAT" - true. It helps in two ways, one is generation of black money and also, no record of receiving money to the client, which deprive client to raise further dispute against the pleader.

"3. Legally literate and Capable but don't have time to spare since the judicial system has no respect for citizen's time " very perfect. Many of us suffer due to these loop wholes.

" legal citizen" - what is this? The legal term is 'in person' - who represent himself or herself at court.