still confused

why was it necessary and important that kaazi saab be present at the second talaak .

if I am not wrong, he was not present for the third talaak .so is the third talaak valid. is the whole talaak valid because the kaazi saab wasn't there for 3rd talaak.

some will say that it's not necessary that kaazi saab be present and that only two witnesses be there. but that didn't happen in the 2nd talaak even though there were more than 2 people in the boardroom. still they requested the presence of kaazi saab.

i would like to think that the 3rd talaak didn't happen. I hope so.

Don't know dear...all I can say is they have made their own rules up.but in reality only 2 witness is enough no need for Kazi to be present.

Beintehaa is unpredictable
I will only say wait and watch