Mr. Raian Nogi Karanjawala is an established name when it comes to handling complex legal issues affecting influential people from political, social, and industrial fronts alike. Currently the Managing Partner of his three-decade-old boutique law firm Karanjawala & Co., Mr. Karajanwala has an illustrious legal career with innumerable personal and professional connections. His firm has represented notable dignitaries, organisations, and companies including late Mr. Madhavrao Scindia, Mr. Sharad Pawar, Coca–Cola and BCCI, among others. A recipient of numerous awards and accolades, he is the go-to litigator and strategist in India for complex litigation as well as notable causes and enjoys an immense presence in India. Here is his interview with Desi Kaanoon-
Q. With a splendid alma mater located in two of the metro cities, how have locations been an advantage for you in terms of exposure?
A. After I passed out of St. Columba’s School, I joined Shriram College of Commerce for my B. Com in Delhi and then went on to the Government Law College at Bombay for the study of Law. The important thing to remember is that each of these three institutions, was the premier institution in its field at that time andthe advantage of studying in a top institution of its time is not only what is taught to you and how it is taught, but also the peers with whom you interact. It is these connections that you make that often enrich your life. Therefore, when I was in Shriram College, as is quite commonly known, I had the good fortune to meet in my very first week of admission into that college, the person who then became my lifelong friend – Mr Arun Jaitley, former Finance and Defence Minister of India. Also, a year later, I caught up with another of my very close friend, Mr Rohinton Nariman, now a Judge of the Supreme Court of India.Amongst my other good friends were also Justice Arjun Sikri, again a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, Mr Vijay Goel, former Union Minister and aspirant for the post of Delhi CM; as also Mr Rajat Sharma, the proprietor and owner of India TV. I also acquired a Bollywood connection through my friendship with Mr Gulshan Grover.Connections and interactions with these kinds of people, always stand you in good stead.
Further, since I was the captain of the Shriram College’s debating team, I debated against and became friendly with various other well-known debaters; to name a few – Mr Hardeep Singh Puri from Hindu College, our current Minister of Civil Aviation as also Housing and Urban Affairs, Mr Pawan Varma from the Law college, former Ambassador and an Adviser to the Chief Minister of Bihar as also former Member of Parliament, Mr Shashi Tharoor, former Union Minister and at one time aspirant for the post of Secretary-General of the United Nations. As a result of student politics, I also met at a very early age, Mr Ravi Shankar Prasad, our current Minister of Law and Justice. In Government Law College, I met a person, who has become one of my closest friends today, namely Mr Mukul Rohatgi, our former Attorney General and a leading Senior Counsel; as also studying in the same batch with me, were both Mr Shardul Shroff, Executive Chairman of the law firm -Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. and Mr Berjis Desai, former Managing Partner of JSA. It is these connections made in college which stay with you through life.
The other advantage of having studied in two separate metros was that whilst today Delhi and Bombay are broadly the same in their social outlook, in those days the contrast was huge. Bombay was a cosmopolitan commercial city, and Delhi was still relativelyconservative and had a somewhat small-town approach to things. It was this change in geography when I went from Delhi to Bombay that also broadened my horizons and approach to life.
The other important thing to remember is that when I joined Parekh & Co., and then later on when my wife, Manik and I started our private practice, a large part of our practice came from Bombay and the many people I met whilst studying there, as also the interaction that I had with several of them while working in Parekh & Co., came very much to our advantage when we started our private practice.
Q. You have been a skilled strategist when it comes to complex legal issues as well as fighting for noble causes. How, according to you, do the litigating skills differ in both the cases?
A. The vital thing to note is that whilst one puts one’s best foot forward whether in dealing with a complex commercial issue or fighting a pro bono cause, when you are dealing with a complex commercial issue, you usually have the benefit of the client’s corporate team, advising you and giving you inputs throughout. It, therefore, tends to ensure that mistakes are not made, and things are not overlooked. When you are doing a Public Interest Litigation, the client usually is not well off and often does not have the wherewithal to conduct the litigation in the manner in which a corporate could. The responsibility, therefore in a pro bono litigation, is all the more on the firm and the lawyer, as you have to ensure that no point is missed out, all aspects are researched, and the case is fought as well as any other commercial case.
Q. How did it feel being acknowledged as one of the 50 most influential people in India by India Today back then in 2004?
A. It was at lunch thrown at Priya Paul’s house for her engagement when Mr Prabhu Chawla, the then Editor-in-Chief, India Today, first walked up to me and indicated that my name was being considered for the”Power list” that they were contemplating taking out. My first reaction was one of mild disbelief, but, when I did come on the list, I was delighted as who would not like to be described (whether rightly or wrongly) as one of India’s most influential people. It was all the more surprising because I was, if I recollect correctly, among the earliest, if not the very first lawyer, to find my way on such a list as this was before Mr Harish Salve, Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr Fali Nariman made it to that list. It was a surprise to many, and I remember Madhu Trehan asking me as to how I found my way on such a list. I feel on closer scrutiny that it wasn’t so much me, but the firm that I own, and which carries my name, which ensured that I made the cut. When putting me on the list, they described Karanjawala & Co. as ‘first port of call for several powerful people in legal trouble’. It was this aspect of our practice and the fact that a disparate group of clients came our way in large numbers that ultimately, I think, prevailed on them to include me.
Q. Your firm Karanjawala & Co., requires no introduction. How were the initial days like and what hardships did you face in establishing a base?
A. Both Manik and I, before starting our firm, were working in P.H. Parekh & Co. Shortly after we got married in April 1982, Manik sat for the Advocate-on-Record exam of the Supreme Court, cleared it, and it was this aspect which prompted both of us to decide that we should sooner or later start our practice. Manik’s father, Justice V.M. Tarkunde, was a well-known Senior Advocate. When Manik and I had worked in P.H. Parekh & Co., we had interacted closely with all the top counsels, apart from my father-in-law (Justice V.M. Tarkunde), like Mr Fali Nariman, Mr Soli Sorabjee, Mr K.K. Venugopal, Dr Y.S. Chitale, Mr P. R. Mridul, Mr Anil Divan etall. Therefore, we felt that we were well placed and sufficiently familiar with everyone to start our practice. My first office was in B-17, Maharani Bagh, the barsati of my father-in-law’s house and it was divided into two parts; on the inside were two desks – one for Manik and another for me, and outside was where the staff and the stenos sat. We were fortunate that from an early stage our work was always a little more and a little ahead of what people in our age group got and shortly on our becoming independent we got a big case of Swadeshi Polytech in which a whole team of us juniors/advisors namely Mr Arun Jaitley, Mr Pinaki Misra, Ms Bina Gupta and I along with Mr Gurumurthy briefed a team of Mr K.K. Venugopal, Mr Anil B. Divan and Mr Ashok Desai. This matter went on for months in the Supreme Court, and it was this matter which propelled us to early success. The work used to be divided between the two of us, and I recollect, that Manik and I never worked on matters together. Manik was I think and believed by most to be the more profound lawyer and certainly the better draftsman, and so our combination worked well, and God has been very kind. There were no real hardships that we faced in our early days, except for the usual apprehension that everyone has when waiting for clients and success to come knocking at their door.
Q. Your firm has a high-profile clientele including Star TV, TATA Group, Lufthansa, Bombay Dyeing, Hindustan Lever, Colgate, Taj Group, and even politicians and actors like Mr Udhav Thackeray and Karishma Kapoor. What do you feel is the essential part of securing the trust of the client?
A. It is important to note that in our profession, one’s practice grows only by way of word of mouth. It is one client who introduces you to another one, who in turn introduces you to two more. By way of example, early in my career as an independent practitioner, Indian Express had come to me as a client somewhere in the year 1985-86. Arun and I used to work together in their matters. It was through Mr Ramnath Goenka and Mr Arun Shourie that I met Mr Nusli Wadia somewhere in the year 1986, and later on Mr V.P. Singh, former Prime Minister of India, in the year 1987. Nusli, in turn, introduced me to the Tatas for the first time in the year 1996 when we appeared for Mr R.K. Krishna Kumar in what was known as the ULFA funding case. It was our interaction in that particular case with Mr Ratan Tata that in turn years later prompted him to ensure that the group companies used our firm on many of their other matters till somewhere in the year 2004, the Tata Group started coming to us in a regular and large scale way. So, the thing to remember is that no client is going to suggest your name to another person unless you give him the following levels of comfort:
- he must feel that the advice that you give is frank yet sound; and
- he must feel that you are capable of executing litigation efficiently so that it brings the client success.
These are fundamental before the client acquires faith in you.
Q. Fighting high profile cases come with their cons. There would have been times where you would have received criticism for defending a particular case. How do you deal with that?
A. High-profile cases not only consume the client but sometimes the lawyer himself as they can often make or break the lawyer’s practice because these cases are fought not only in the courtroom but also in the public domain. In these kinds of cases,the lawyer has to be skilled not only in the courtroom but even before the camera. I have noticed several cases which have taken an adverse turn for the client merely because of how the lawyer represented the client’s point of view in a TV debate or because the lawyer permitted the client to appear in public when he would have been better advised not to speak. The important thing to remember is that in these high-profile cases, sometimes it is better to say nothing at all rather than rush forward with one’s viewpoint. One such case which we had to handle with a considerable amount of delicacy was the Tarun Tejpal case, in which, I recollect that for the first week I had virtually kept my phone on silent so that I would not be inundated with calls from various parts of the Press. There will be occasions in such matters when you have to come out, but sometimes, it is a better strategy just to issue a written statement rather than face a TV camera, so that whatever you want to say is said in a precise way. These are all things that you learn as you go along and frankly there is no one formula which succeeds in every case.
Q. You are known for your close friendships and associations with many big names in business and political circles. What have these connections taught you professionally and personally?
A. Strange, though it may sound, my friendships are primarily personal. I try as far as is possible to keep my evenings free for social interaction and do not allow professional interaction to cloud it. Therefore, one of the things that I have always done even in the context of my well-known and important clients is not to allow my social friendship to mix with my professional ones. It is something that I think has paid me in good stead and is something that I recommend for all.
Q. What is your best courtroom memory?
A. Rather than pick out one such memory, I prefer to enumerate my recollection of what I think were the best pieces of advocacy that I saw in my lifetime. First would be Nani Palkhivala arguing KP Verghese’s case which pertained to Section 52(2) of the Income Tax Act. It came up in Court Room No. 2 before Justice Bhagwati and Palkhivala came in on the second day, took over from Mr Anil Divan and completely turned the Bench in the course of the first round of his arguments. I know that Justice Bhagwati told his daughter Pallavi Shroff later that he too felt that this was one of Palkhivala’s best arguments. The second argument that comes to mind was parts and patches of H.M. Seervai’s argument in the first Judge’s case, namely S.P. Gupta. Incidentally, both Manik and I were juniors in that case. The third argument that comes to mind was Fali Nariman’s rejoinder in the UCO Bank case where he was devastating and after that in our office (at that time P.H. Parekh & Co.) he was given the nickname ‘the Cannon’. Incidentally, I was also in that matter. The other counsel whose performance comes to mind was Mr Soli Sorabjee when arguing Sanjay Gandhi’s bail cancellation before Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, the then Chief Justice of India. Lastly, the other case that I recollect was KK Venugopal in specific patches of the Swadeshi Polytech case.
Q. Do you believe law firms should switch to “smart work” in these times of the pandemic?
A. Yes, definitely law firms should switch to “smart work” in these pandemic times, and in my view at least in so far as the Apex Court is concerned, virtual hearings should perhaps in a small percentage be permanently embedded in the advocacy of the Supreme Court.
Mr Raian Karanjawala is available on raian@raian.in