LCI Learning
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


Page no : 2

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     12 November 2010

i think compulsory one monthly meeting of parties on weekends on video recording should be done in order to settle cases. there shud be no advocates allowed as they are a major hinderance to mutually arrived settlements (if parties arrive at mutual settlement advocates ask hefty percentage to settle it)

valentine thakkar (advocate)     13 November 2010

Stating that lawyers are the main hindrance for settling the family matters is a sweeping and offending comment. All advocates are not the same. Besides, many times I have observed that the Family Court is interested only in adjournments and take the advantage of Sec. 13 of the FCA. The parties can talk more freely to their advocates than to the judges who sit on the higher chair and dominate. I have one case which is lingering in the FC since 3 years. Because of such delay the Apex Court has recommended to include irretrievable breakdown of marriage as one of the grounds. However, the same has been objected to by the Woman's  Organisations in the cabinet. Another hindrance is the principle of settlement which the FC has to keep in mind in all family disputes.

2 Like

Jamai Of Law (propra)     13 November 2010

@Valentine ji,


I disagree with Your comments that:

1 .Family Court is interested only in adjournments .... (there are a very few FC rest all have to go to civil courts only.)

2. The parties can talk more freely to their advocates than to the judges ....(not necessarily.)

3. Because of such delay it's the the Apex Court who has recommended to include irretrievable breakdown of marriage as one of the grounds....


It sounds entirely erroneous if you allow me to regeister my view here......





Rather SC says that ...............only SC has right to use IrBM.

If parties go upto SC and level allegation against each other to such a shameless extent and wash the linen in public and fight for 'winning the divorce' instead of getting it 'slapped', .....



then only...... SC has drawn the conclusions that neither party wants to 'save' the marriage but merely wants to have a vindicative certificate of winning the divorce against the othe party!!, ...


and at that time SC has expressed views doesn't make any difference anylonger as to 'which party was at fault' and it can be contrued as 'marriage is irretrievably broken' by virtue of the lengthy matrimonial battle and the character and nature of allegations leveled by both parties against each other and the existance of not only a claim by petitioner but also a counter-claim by respondent  !!!!,


And hence,  'who wins the divorce' has lost the significance in the case, at the end...............................


But Divorce becomes applicable to both parties...

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     13 November 2010

valentine ji wat percentage of settlement amount of a  case where there is divorce & 498a going u would charge to settle as MCD? or u take fixed fee. i highly condemn practice of percentage of settlement amount , looks like advocates turning into Dalals.

1 Like


@Avnish Kaur

Yes,Avnish you are 100% right.I hate practice of percentage of settlement amount.How this evil enter in advocate practise ?:/Bar  council should restrict this.

1 Like

manjit kalra (system eng)     13 November 2010

100% agree with advocate Kushan , this Malpractice of Broker-percentage  in settlement in Mutual Consent Divorce (MCD) cannot be allowed to  continue and Bar  Council ought to ban it.

this is where financial interest in flaring up family matters by instigating lady  to file false 498a and fake dowry harassment complaints comes in. this is the reason why some advocates believe in training legal terrorists even on LCI .IF there is a MCD divorce settlement man will pay suppose 1X rupee, but if there are several fake criminal cases also settled alongwith man will pay 5x.

so an advocate gets 5 times commision to broker a MCD in cases with spice of fake 498a and dowry charges added to it. THIS IS THE ROOT CAUSE OF MORE THAN 90% FAKE CASES OF dowry and 498a in courts.

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     14 November 2010

yes this is the secret of most lawyers not allowing family cases for settlement by reconciliation, thus failing the main objective of preservation of family as far as possible.

most of them will

1. prolong cases to get maximum fees.

2. not allow recociliation of warring couple , rather flare up matter to worse by false 498a and dowry allegations and later ask them for MCD and get their percentage even on mutual settlement.

there was a saying alive elephant value one lakh and dead one one and half lakh, same appplies here too, they earn even on death of marriage by doing nothing. :)

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     14 November 2010

is there any bar coucil ethics code for lawyers not to indulge in brokership in family matters?

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     14 November 2010

mr sriniwasan ji

the number of scavangers has increased, and situation has rather worsened.

ur statement ,

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.

its like saying there are unemployment of doctors, lets spread few diseases like malaria, dengue and chikangunya . so promote mosquitoes all over india.

dont just see matri cases from job prospective, look in human terms too. families breaking up, people suffering for long golden period of their life.


valentine thakkar (advocate)     14 November 2010


The suggestion to incorporate this ground has been sent to the PM by the Apex Court. Nowhere is it mentioned that only SC can deal with this new ground. In the case under reference under which this issue came up was pertaining to husband not appearing in the court for months together and as per CPC it was his turn to begin the case.

2. There is a provision for appearance and non-appearance of parties in CPC however at the discretion of the court, the court can rule that the provisions of CPC and Evidence Act do not apply to the Family Court. Thus, the matters are delayed at  the will of the Judge. I have at present one divorce case in the FC where the husband is not appearing and on my application to stop their evidence stage, the Judge rejected saying I have no right to begin the case at this stage. Even affidavit from the petitioner was not allowed on the pretext that the opponent should be first of all given the opportunity to be heard. That's why I say that the FCs are interested only in lingering the cases in many instances.

3. It has become a fashion to pass derogatory remarks against the lawyers. Instead, they should test the candidates before giving them the Sanad but once Sanad is given there should be no comment. Or else let us apply for code of conduct and appoint vigilance officers to keep an eye on offending lawyers. 

4. The CJIs of SC have time and again averred the corruption in judiciary. Why no action is taken on that? Why in many cases judgements are bought and the judge remains shielded?

2 Like

valentine thakkar (advocate)     14 November 2010


I am well-placed in life. I hardly need any money for survival. I have already made provision for my family and myself. However, I charge a meager amount of Rs. 5000/- in Family Matters. However, Family Matters are my favourite. I have struck many settlements but in the most correct and legal way. I do not take money for settlement in FM. However, I charge at will in other cases.

2 Like


It is very easy to put imputations against advocates' community.  Let us assume that advocates are barred totally to participate in FC matters.  What will happen?

The science of law is very intricate and requires higher skills.  For example, a section starts with a clause "notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being", which is called "non-obstante clause".  Who would interpret the correct meaning of this phrase in the facts and circumstances of the case.  If there are two "non-obstante clauses" in a single statute, who will interpret them?  Husband or wife?  If it will be left to the whims and fancies of judge, there is a likelihood of mis-interpreation.  There, the advocates' assistance to the judge is required.  Besides this, there are several problems come up in the absence of advocates' presence.  What is desertion?  What is constructive desertion?  What is cruelty?  What amounts to mental cruelty?  What is resjudicata?  What is maintainability of the petition?  Who can argue all these things?  Husband or wife?  Or you leave it to the discretion of the judge to decide whatever he likes.  If the judge is not assisted by advocates, he feels handicapped.  Who would appraise the latest case law on family matters?  Hundreds of judgements are dished out every month.   A judge cannot keep up with the latest case law.  There advocates' presence is required.

Yes, I agreee. Some times, due to advocates' presence, the case may be delayed as some advocates may file frivolous applications under C.P.C.  There, the judge has to take a decisive step and dismiss the frivolous interim applications with heavy costs.  The administration of court is, after all, judge's responsibility.

Now, some people say that exclusion of advocates may expedite the cases.  It is not correct.  Their exclusion is limited to only trial courts.  Their presence cannot be barred in appellate stage/ revisional stage in the High Court.  There, advocates again present in the case and the whole purpose of excluding the advocates at the trial stage will be defeated.  More over, if the advocates are barred in trial court, take it granted, every case will go to appeal, as the parties themselves are not satisfied with the trial court proceedings due to absence of their chosen advocates.

Finally, if you go through the questions put up by the parties on this forum, you can certainly come to conclusion, that advocates' presence in family court is desirable. 

3 Like

Originally posted by :Avnish Kaur
The Principal Judge of Chennai-Family Court has sent out this circular to strictly follow sec 13 of the Family Courts Act. This means lawyers are kept at abeyance and cannot walk in and represent clients.


At a glance it is a VERY GOOD NEWS. The justice system should be as simple so there should be no need of professional lawyer / advocate.  In this process to make the justice system free from professional advocacy those lawyers/advocates may opt other business like PAN-SHOP, KIRANA STORE, GENERAL STORE AND and many other jobs which people do and those who have no other option for any reason they may get guaranteed employment in NAREGA too.





"those lawyers/advocates may opt other business like PAN-SHOP, KIRANA STORE, GENERAL STORE AND and many other jobs which people do and those who have no other option for any reason they may get guaranteed employment in NAREGA too."

Ye aapna updesh apne pass rakho.You are a sick person.

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     14 November 2010

The conclusion is lawyers are needed AS OFFICERS OF LAW, but they shud try for reconciliation as far as possible. and practice of percentage of settlement amount in cases of MCD needs to be condemned and bar council should take steps in this regard.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register