You have to file an application seeking permission to appear in person by withdrawing the advocate on record. Court will give such permission. Then you can appear in person in court.
Should I bring my legal counsel always
I have appointed a lawyer for my case. I know that my opposite party is playing the game by adjourning the hearings on some or other pretext. In that event, I requested the court to grant me the privilege to be present in court through Hazira, but the Judge did not allow. Is that the rule that no matter what, even as a litigant, I do not have any privilege of Hazira in court. Is that I have to necessarily ask the Lawyer to be present and pay because he takes fee for every appearance ? Can't I appear in court and even lead the argument in the absence of my Lawyer as a litigant ? Any apex court or high court ruling for that ?
Asked 4 years ago in Civil Law
26 Answers
When you have engaged lawyer to appear on your behalf you cannot appear in person
2) your arguments have to be done by your lawyer
3) you can inform the court that you do not want to engage Lawyer and may be allowed to appear in person
If I disengage my lawyer now, could I reengage him after some hearings when I know that my arguments are likely to come up ? In the presence of lawyer, if the court will allow me to lead certain arguments ?
Asked 4 years ago
Appoint lawyer wisely, fees of advocate decide with discussion. This way your lawyer will keep harassing you as by adjournment he is getting benefited on every date. Change this lawyer or decide one time fees.
Party is not accustom of law and specifics of civil/criminal procedure. Hence, denying you Haziraby court is for your good.
You can disengage him, no bar. And party can appear in person with the leave of court but make sure for any result only party will responsible.
You can but it's courts impression that when you have appointed lawyer then he will argue. You can inform the court that you pay the lawyer date wise and therefore I need to argue when I can't afford him to pay the same
You can re appoint your lawyer later
in presence of Lawyer you are not entitled to argue your case
See you can engage lawyer for only effective hearing and can engage a local lawyer for taking dates it will cost you less if your lawyer is charging you more.
Also as a litigant if court permits you can present case your self or you can talk to your lawyer that you will pay only for effective hearings.
If this lawyer is charging you for every appearance then nothing stops you to engage another lawyer who would charge you on a lump sum basis
The lawyer charges you for the appearance because he has to spend time for the same even if nothing happens in your matter. He would have to manage his other work and clients to attend to your matter. It is for that he charges you
If he is not competent then you can always discharge him and appoint some other lawyer
If you want to save money then you are not bound to engage any lawyer and can appear as a party in person also. When the time for arguments come you can engage a counsel who is not required to file a vakalat
There is no judgment of any court which you are asking
You either engage a lawyer or appear in person
If you have a lawyer then you cannot appear.
you can engage lawyer with approval of court. It is permissible.
You have choose, that either you will represent yourself or you will be represented by your lawyer in court of Law.
If you have engaged a lawyer then let him represent your matter and pay him fee for the same.
During a proceeding, if a lawyer is representing a client, then client is entitled to ans questions only when specifically asked by the Judge from client.
However, if you think that you are competent , then make a submission in court, that you will not engage a lawyer and you will represent yourself on your own as Party in Person.
When judge allows you to contest as party in person, then you will contest your matter on your own, you will not be required to be represented through a lawyer.
There is no absolute bar to appear. In fact, with the leave of the Court, a non-advocate is still permitted to appear even without a local advocate
Generally cases are by two ways one is on the basis of full case fee or another one is per hearing fees, so you can ask your lawyer what course of action suits to you but this is not possible that without asking him you alone appear in the court as an accused by your own wish so don't think otherwise and discuss with your lawyer.
If you want to appear in court as party in person, you can very well do that but you should inform court that you will be appearing as party in person only hence your lawyer will not appear before court on your behalf after that.
You can give a memo in this connection to the court which will record the same and allow yo to argue your case by yourself.
You can disengage the services of your lawyer for the present and can re-engage the services at a later stage also.
There is no legal infirmity in it.
Dear
As long as you doesn't withdraw the Vakalatnama your lawyer has given in court you can't appear in person in court.
After disengaging your lawyer you need to make application for permission to appear in person.
You can engage your lawyer at later stage during arguments.
If the Judges fear to rule in favor of a client appearing for himself and the opposite party being represented by a big corporate lawyer. The general presumption is, a big lawyer comes with a big knowledge about the law whereas a client comes with no knowledge. The Judges are humans and such prejudiced presumption could lead the Judge to listen carefully to each and every word by the big lawyer, whereas the same Judge gets unjustifiably irritated about the arguments led by the litigant. I observed that the Judge did not ask any question to the corporate lawyer, that corroborates my point that the Judges fear the big lawyers under some prejudiced assumption that these lawyers know better. This is the reason why many big lawyers charge more because the judges would listen to them carefully. My fear is, even if I bring valid case laws, be precise and specific during arguments without wasting court's time, but the Judge would be impatient and cut me off by asking complicated questions for the purpose of getting frustrated quickly so that he could wrap up the arguments sooner. My other fear is, I have observed some lawyers bullying the lower court Judge and the Judge being so humble. The court is a turf for the lawyers. Could a litigant, being an odd man out, even if he does better in all aspects, would be able to cut the ice with the court ?
Asked 4 years ago
If you have good case on merits you would succeed irrespective of fact that OP has engaged a big lawyer to argue on his behalf
However it is always advisable to engage a lawyer to appear on your behalf . He need not be senior lawyer
This are not relevant.
Only thing relevant is merits of the matter and all related record be filed with Court .
your job is to contest on merits. Make submissions that you want to contest on merits.
Nobody can ever stop you to contest on merits.
See if litigant is on point having merits in case he would be heard and granted relief. Though litigant may fail to satisfy court on technical aspects so it is always better to engage a lawyer bur in case you are also litigating you can be well prepared and can answer court accurately there won't be any prejudice you will be heard and relief shall be given.
You submit a written argument and case laws for your argument.
No judge can ever go against the settled law of the land.
If they do so then you may easily challenge the same before the Higher Court.
Regards
Under the given circumstances if you apprehend any discrimination or a judgment against you, better you present your argument in writing.
The written arguments along with the citations submitted supporting your arguments and pleadings would help you to present your case in a better manner before the appellate court.
Moreover this will crate fear in the minds of the judge especially when they apprehend that you would prefer an appeal against the aggrieved judgment and if there is something wrong in the judgment despite the litigant argued the matter properly despite appearing as a party in person, hence this will help you to solve the problem you apprehend.
I thank all my Advocates in this forum who advised me to argue my own case. I convinced my Lawyer for NOC to lead the battle myself against a big brokerage house IIFL who hired a top Law firm Khaitan & Co to contest the NSE Tribunal award. First, they hijacked the case by grabbing 18 hearings (out of 20) and confused the court with unrelated provisions of Contract Act, doctrine of estoppel and doctrine of acquiescence by ratification etc. For me, it was a tough terrain ahead as the Judge was new to SEBI and NSE. He was visibly convinced by their argument that the Tribunal erred in Law. Thus, I had to educate the court that the guiding Law in this case was the statutes mandated by SEBI and NSE as per the Security Contract Regulation Act, not the Contact Acts as shown by them. I argued that the IIFL cheated and defrauded by not complying with the statutory mandate of SEBI and NSE. To convince the Judge, I researched and pulled almost nine citations by the Supreme Court and High Courts to justify each and every point of my arguments. I included each relevant statutory provision of SEBI/NSE and all the citations by the Supreme Court/High Courts in my "written note of arguments". Finally, the Judge was convinced and he dismissed the IIFL's appeal u/s 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. But the IIFL again appealed to the Calcutta High Court under section 37 and engaged another Law Firm to argue against the order of the Lower Court . When asked by the division bench of the Calcutta HC, I confirmed to lead my own case. After an hour long arguments by the opposite Lawyers on the 1st day itself, the presiding Judge looked at me, smiled and said that there was no need for me to say anything. Then, he read out the order dismissing the appeal filed by the broker u/s 37. The NSE immediately thereafter paid the award amount to me as per the Tribunal order. I am still battle ready if the IIFL files SLP before the Supreme Court, but not sure if they will do it. Thanks Again.
Asked 4 years ago
Amount is paid. Issue is over. NO appeal lies now.
Great job, congratulations on your hard work and win.
A litigant has all the right to fight his own case and the judges need to give the ruling on merits only. If not given you have all to approach Appellate court
Thanks for your appreciation
you have received the award amount from NSE
you should succeed in SC too
Thanks. You have done a great job. It is really appreciable. Keep it up.
You are welcome for your appreciations.
At the same time my hearty congratulations on your victory in this legal battle especially against a giant or robust law firm which has been made to swallow its defeat by your extraordinary efforts to thwart their false and misleading statements and views.
In my opinion, since the opposite party has been taught proper lesson twice, they may not dare to fight once again with a SLP .
They don't have proper grounds or reason to challenge the order of appeal.
- Generally lawyer not accept to be appear before the court , as and when a client required him , due to filing POA /Vakalatnama on behalf of the client , however one can amicably settle the issue as well.
- If you already engage a lawyer , then court will prefer to heard the argument through lawyer.
- However, if you want to argue the matter personally, then you will have to inform the court for the same ,and for getting permission.
- And further , in need ,you can re-engage a lawyer as well.
