ONE SENTENCE CHANGED THE FATE

Summary: Command over language is an asset for a legal practitioner. It is explained, over seven part series, through life of Kanhaiya Lal Misra (31.08.1903 – 14.10.1975) - one of the greatest advocates of our country, who reined supreme in 1950s and 1960s. 

In the first part, two incidents related to him are narrated: one is by my father VKS Chaudhary and the other is by Vibhav Bhushan Mishra, both senior advocates and later adorned the post of Advocate General.

Command Over Language Is An Asset

One Sentence Changed The Fate।। Advocate General taught English To Me।। Misfortune of Being Opposed by KL Misra ।। Present Evolves Out Of The Past।। Has Rhetoric Any Place In Court?।। Ruling May Not Choke My Intelligence।। Well Read Person - Best Prepared For Law।।

The Advocates Act 1961 defines the words Advocate, Law Graduate and Legal practitioner but does not define the word lawyers. If we leave the definition part then in legal world, the words ‘Advocate’ and ‘Lawyer’ are often used interchangeably but there is fine distinction between the the two. An advocate is one, who has great command over language and has great time with jury; whereas a lawyer is well versed in law with logic at his command and has better control over judge. Some are gifted advocates; some are gifted lawyers but few are both.

Fali Nariman in his autobiography ‘Before Memory Fades’ says,

“It is an illusion to think that great cases are won or lost because of their inherent strength or weakness. In any case it is not universally true. Advocacy plays a vital role, simply because the judge is also human, like the Advocate - the only difference is that he or she is trained to control emotions better.”

Kanhaiya Lal Misra,  the fourth Advocate General of UP,  had command over language and blessing of Goddess Sarswati. He was a gifted advocate as well as a gifted lawyer.

My father VKS Chaudhary, a senior advocate and later Advocate General himself,  often used to tell me that so great was KL Misra’s persuasive power that he could mesmerise the court and if he (my father) was ever accused of a murder then only advocate he would engage was KL Misra, so great was his intelligence and command over the language. 

“KL Misra was one of the most powerful Advocates of his time and one of the most persuasive”, records Fali Nariman in his autobiography. 

My father in his autobiography ‘Offerings at the Altar: My Reminiscences of the Bar’ talks about one instance, where one sentence from KL Misra changed the complexion and fate of the case.

Incident From My Father's Autobiography

Anand Pal Singh Chauhan (elder brother of DPS Chauhan J.) initially practised in the High Court. He later shifted to the Supreme Court. One of his relative practising in Lakhirmpur Kheri was instructed to file an appeal before District Judge. It involved huge court fees. 

The client instructed the lawyer to file appeal with court fees for declaratory suit only and file the proper court fees after the record was received and verified. Accordingly, the appeal was so filed. The lawyer did not get notice and the appeal was dismissed for deficient court fees. The client made complaint to the court as well as to the Bar counsel. It is at this stage my father was requested by APS Chauhan to appear before the District Judge. 

An application with remaining court fees was filed and appeal was restored but in the meantime the complaint was taken by the disciplinary tribunal of the Bar council. It consisted of two members of the Bar Council and one  Ambika Prasad Pandey advocate of the Allahabad High Court. 

The disciplinary committee was unanimous in the view that the client had instructed the lawyer to file appeal on declaratory decree and was to pay ad-valorem fee after receipt of the records. On this, the two members concurred that the lawyer was not guilty of misconduct but the third member AP Pandey added that the lawyer had duty towards the court and should have filed the appeal with proper court fees. This is how the matter came before three judge bench of the Allahabad High Court presided over by Chief Justice Mootham.

Bar Association passed a resolution to support the lawyer. SBL Gaur, secretary of the Bar, and the government advocate also appeared and supported the case of the lawyer. The Chief Justice OH Mootham and one other judge were inclined to drop the proceeding but Raghubar Dayal J. was not so inclined. He thought that the lawyer ignored the higher duty to the Court. At this stage, Chief Justice asked for the Advocate General KL Misra. 

My father went to the chamber of the  Advocate General  to fetch him, who on the way asked my father about the case. As they entered the court, Raghubar Dayal J. questioningly mentioned to the Advocate General that the advocate had higher duty to the court and he ignored it.

My father wondered how will KL Misra answer, as he had not seen the record but only had a minute’s briefing, on his way to the court. 

“My Lords, the duty is indivisible. There can not be two duties: one to the client and the other to the court,” answered the Advocate General. 

With one sentence, not only the court became spell bound but level of the argument lifted on the higher pedestal: the fate of the case also changed.

Incident Narrated by Vibhav Bhushan Upadhyaya

Vibhava Bhushan Upadhyaya, senior advocate and also Advocate General for the State, once told me about a case of the firm M/s Neeke Lal Jai Narayan under Excise Profit Tax Act, where he had briefed KL Misra. It was reference on behalf of the Revenue and soon the Bench was convinced with their case and Assessee were called upon.

"My Lords, I appear for Neeke Lal, which means good fellow" so started KL Misra then sailed on a journey with the judges as to why particular names are given, what is effect of the name on them, and ceremony of Namkaran Sanskar but nothing on the merit of the case. 

VB Upadhyaya was reasonably worried. He would get up to tell KL Misra about the case but was affectionately gestured to sit down. After a while, KL Misra realised the impatience of VB Upadhyaya, he scribbled a note and passed it on to him. A question was mentioned therein and the fact that KL Misra was waiting for the judges to ask that question. 

Some time passed and same drama went on, then one of the judges asked the same question. It was then KL Misra started the case on merit, tides were turned and question answered in favour of Assessee. This incident is a fine example of court craft bringing the judges to a point that you wish to emphasise.  

In the next two posts, we will talk about, what the corridors of the Allahabad High Court reverberate about KL Misra.

#KanhaiyaLalMisra #VKSChaudhary #VirendraKumarSinghChaudhary #OfferingsAtTheAltar #VibhavaBhushanUpadhyaya #AllahabadHighCourt #Law #LanguageImprovement