- (1.) THIS appeal under Sec. 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short `the Act, 1925') is filed by the appellants against the judgment dated 17. 1. 2002 of the District Judge, Sikar in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 87 of 1999.
(2.) THE appellant filed application under Section 372 of the Act, 1925 for succession certificate. The learned court below under its order aforestated granted this application and succession certificate has been issued in favour of the appellants and the respondents No. 1 and 2 in proportion of 1/3rd each in respect of the amounts mentioned in division VII of the application, hence this appeal. This appeal is presented on 9th of March, 2002. The office has pointed out the defect "court Fee deficit Rs. 9360/-". The appellants are - the widow of late Gulab Singh and two minor sons of aged 13 and 10 years. This lady and two minors are not in a position to pay the court fees. As per Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short "the Act, 1987') and more particularly clause (c) thereof, the appellants, woman and minors, are entitled for legal services. Section 12 of the Act reads, "12. Criteria for giving legal services - Every Person who has to file or defend a a case shall be entitled to legal services under this Act if that. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (c) a woman or a child; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " Legal services are defined in clause (c) of Sec. 2 of the Act 1987 which reads, " (c) "legal service" includes the rendering of any service in the con- duct of any case or other legal proceeding before any Court or other authority or tribunal and the giving of advice on any legal matter;" The object and purpose of the Act, 1987 is to provide free and competent legal service to weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunity for securing justice is not denied to any citçen by the reason of economic or other disabilities and to organise Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of legal system promotes justices on a basis of equal opportunity. The persons enumerated in clause (a) to (h) are entitled for legal services and the appellants falls under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, 1987, thus, there cannot be any dispute that they are entitled for legal service.
(3.) IT is true that the appellants have not applied for the legal service to the Rajasthan High Court Legal Service Committee, but that is not the end of the matter or disentitles them from consideration by the committee of their this right. The legal services which are to be provided under the Act, 1987 is not a charity or a donation or a mercy or sympathy or concession. IT is a legal right conferred to this clause of persons under the Act. 1987. IT is a different matter that the Advocate has not taken the steps advising the appellants to file this appeal taking legal services from the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee. In case it would have been done I am confident that leaving apart the question of court fee the amount of other expenses would have granted and the services of the Advocate at the cost of the state would have been provided. IT is unfortunate that this class of litigants who are entitled for free legal services are not being legally educated, nor made known and informed of their this right by the advocate to whom the approached. Along with the appeal an application under Sec. 149 CPC, 1908 is filed. From this application, though not supported by an affidavit, it comes out the appellants are poor and are not able to pay court fees. In case little trouble and care would have been taken to read the Act, 1987 I am confident that this application would not have been filed. When the appellants are entitled for the legal services they would have been advised to go and to exercise their this legal right but that has not been done and contrarily prayer has been made to defer the payment of the Court fees. Be that as it may be when the matter is placed before the court, it was sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority for examination. The Secretary of the authority has submitted his report. He also personally come in the Court. The matter is not examined with reference to the Act, 1987. It is submitted that whatever order is passed by the Court the same shall be complied it. It is not a proper, reasonable and befitting approach of the Secretary of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority in such matters. ;