BY LAWZ BUREAU.
“Law No Longer Is a Profession. It Has Become Commercial.”
From the very beginning, Mr. Narula wanted to become a lawyer. He never thought of any other profession, even while he was a student. After completing his graduation he did his law and has since then been in practise. At a young age he was designated as a Senior. Mr. Narula talks exclusively with our correspondent Renu Sharma.
Have you noticed any change in the legal practise from the time you started to practise and today?
There have been a lot of changes in the standards of practise which come to notice. Some, like technological changes, are changes for the good. Other changes, like the heavy burden of litigation on courts and the deteriorating quality of justice, are changes which were never wanted. Earlier there used to be a healthy junior and senior relationship. The juniors used to get a lot of opportunities in the preparation of matters. Of course juniors, at that time, were not paid or may have been paid just enough to cover their daily expenses. The courts used to give enough time to the lawyers to plead their cases. This was possible because there was not too much pressure on the courts. Overall the quality of justice was good. Now law has become commercial. Courts are not able to give as much time as they used to give. This, in turn, leads to poor quality of justice. Moreover, the good and honest relation which the Bar and the Bench used to enjoy now seems to be missing. Law no longer is a profession. It has become commercial.
What was the nature of the first case in which you appeared and argued on your own?
The first case which I did was a civil case in the nature of an injunction suit against the electricity department. The department had wrongly sent an inflated bill of Rs. 1 lac, approximately, against which I filed an injunction suit. This was the first case, in which I had on my own drafted the suit, filed the same in the court and also argued before the district court. It was a very important day for me, as it was the first case which I was to argue without my senior. But I was fully confident in the matter. I had at the said time already put in 16 months of practise with my senior. I was able to put across my case before the Judge and, after being satisfied, injunction was granted in favour of my client. It was a very memorable moment for me, when the judge was pronouncing the order. I think I was even more excited than my client.
Many lawyers have chosen to practise only in one area of law. Do you not think that this restriction retards the overall development of a legal person?
I would differ with you in this regard a little. I agree that knowledge of all subjects for a practising lawyer is very important. One cannot say to his client that I do not know the Criminal Procedure Code and only know the C.P.C. All laws, in some sense or the other, are interrelated. As such, basic knowledge in all the fields of law is essential. I think that there is no harm in specialising in a particular field of law. But the important thing to keep in mind, here, is the relevant point of time when you make the decision to specialise. What I would suggest is that, for about 15 years, one should deal in all types of matters. A lawyer should not bar himself from any class of matter. This enables one to get hold of all the major statutes. Once this foundation becomes strong he may opt for a specialisation. But if you say that a lawyer should not at all go for specialised branches of law, then I must say it would be wrong to suggest so.
There is a huge pendancy of cases in the High Courts and even more in the lower Courts. What is the primary cause of this pendancy and what would be your solution to this problem?
The primary reason which comes to my mind is that too much frivolous litigation is being entertained by the courts. This requires an urgent check, else things will get even worse. I must say here that the lawyers community, collectively, needs to work towards stopping these frivolous litigations. If any matter is able to be resolved outside the court, then lawyers must not suggest their clients to go in for unnecessary litigation. They must firstly try to reconcile the dispute. Only in the event of failure should recourse to legal remedies be adopted. I think that by cutting these unnecessary and frivolous litigations the burden on our courts can really come down a lot, and this will also help our judges deliver better quality judgements.
How do you manage to take out time for your family from your busy schedule? Would you want your children also to take the legal professional?
My family has always been my first priority. I think that I have never ignored my family, though I may be very busy with my daily work. It is just a matter of time management. If you are able to manage your time well then you will surely find time for your loved ones. I have always been able to take out time from my busy schedule for my family. I also take out time in the evening for the family and, if possible, go out for a short drive. Sundays I prefer to stay with my family members. On every summer vacation I take a break from work for 4 weeks to be with my family. I think I have been able to strike a correct balance between my professional and family life. I would not force my children to take the legal profession, but if they want to take up the legal profession on their own I will definitely encourage them. Law is a field where you grow in a balanced way. Being in the profession I have seen both sides of the coin, but I would still say that there is no other profession like the legal profession.