Q. As the managing partner of a leading law firm, what are the qualities that you observe in a job applicant for your firm?
A. The primary obligation of lawyers is to maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct. Good communication skills, hard work and the ability to meet deadlines are indispensable merits to possess and are a perk for any aspiring lawyer. The lawyers who do best at work are those who sacrifice themselves and their lifestyles, park themselves should they need to work for long hours. It’s the energetic and willing who reach the zenith.Lawyers should have great attention to detail when working with colleagues and clients. They should be able to pick up on small things in both written documents and when people are verbally communicating. Each lawyer’s own conscience plays an pertinent role and act as a touchstone against the tests which this profession brings in the journey. A person who is abreast with the recent affairs is always given preference. A no as a answer is never accepted and gives a worst impression brining a dead-end to the task. Therefore one should always refrain from giving No as a answer.
We do not solely give preference to academic performance, but more credence to the attitude, conduct and zeal to perceive around an applicant carried in him.
Q. Tell us something about your interview with Wall Street Journal!
A. The WSJ is a US based newspaper based in New York. At that time, they were covering the illustrious Delhi Gang Rape Case. The case dealt with a heinous crime which had affected the conscience of every citizen and had a devastating impact on everyone. They intended to have a brief outlook and stance on the status of the police investigation and where the trial was progressing. At that time, every eye on the country was on the case and different set of opinions were given based upon contemplations and speculations. The main point of address during the interview was the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, what changes it brought, and the extent it could be implemented and the deterrence it shall bring along. The interview was appreciated by many people and my opinion and suggestions were received very well. The main changes which were expected to be brought in at that time were related to gang rape, extended imprisonments, embargo on anticipatory bails etcetera.
Q. Do you feel corporate law in India is still at a nascent stage as compared to Western countries?
A. Mere importation of a legal rule or a statutory code without proper adaptation to local conditions is susceptible to failure. The diffusion of corporate law on the lines of legal families can be attributed to the phenomenon of “legal transplants,” particularly those that occurred during the colonial times in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that witnessed migration of entire systems of law from the empires to the colonies. The evolution of corporate law in India can be traced back to the colonial era with several previous companies’ legislation being modelled on parallel English legislation. The influence of colonial laws continued even after decolonization in 1947 when the most significant piece of corporate legislation, the Companies Act, 1956, which was actually modelled on the English Companies Act of 1948. Although the Companies Act, 1956 was the result of a classic legal transplant, its evolution thereafter took on a different trajectory. With the expansion of foreign investment and the development of India’s capital markets, the focus of corporate law extended beyond the Companies Act, 1956 and into securities laws pertaining to or promulgated by the securities regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India. The divergence between Indian corporate law and its English counterpart became clearer with India’s economic liberalisation in 1991.
The transition from legal transplant to autochthony culminated in the recent enactment of the Companies Act, 2013 that is being brought into effect in parts so as to replace the Companies Act, 1956. The 2013 legislation is not only theresult of nearly two decades of debates and discussions, but also a reaction to corporate law and governance problems that have plagued India more recently. The motive behind transplanting English company law into India was to facilitate better trade between England and India, which could be accomplished if there was symmetry in the corporate legislation between the two countries. The new economic outlook naturally triggered a slew of changes to corporate law in India, which operated on different fronts, including amendments to the Companies Act, introduction of securities legislation to promote the stock markets and adoption of specific measures to enhance corporate governance.
After the establishment and foray of SEBI not only led to more of a disclosure‐based regulation of public offerings of securities by Indian companies, but its role was also focused on promoting India’s capital markets in general. The Companies Act now mandates that Indian companies must carry in their memorandum of association objects clauses specifying the type of business activity that they are permitted to carry on. India has therefore opted to display some level of rigidity on this count despite reforms implemented in other “common law” jurisdictions. On several matters regarding the corporate structure, corporate law in India is far stringent not only in comparison with its colonial past, but more so with reference to contemporary English corporate law.
In answer to the question, I would say that on matters relating to corporate personality and structure, Indian corporate law has continued to hold firmly on to some colonial vestiges such as the ultra-vires doctrine although the mother country and its other former colonies have jettisoned it along the way. On other matters such as group structures, India’s approach has been far more restrictive not only compared to the colonial period, but also in the context of developments in the U.K. and other Western jurisdictions which have moved in the opposite (more liberal) direction.
Q. You have won many awards and accolades. Recently you were awarded with the National Excellence Award for being the Young Achiever and Entrepreneur. What is the guiding factor that keeps you going?
A. Truth is, the business world is risky. It isn’t for the thin-skinned, the weak-minded or the faint of heart. And if you fit one of those colourful descriptors, sooner or later, you’re probably going to get weeded out of the entrepreneurial gene pool. Success is achieved with perseverance. We must keep working, keep trying and keep going. I or my team has never been one to be daunted by an unexpected issue because remaining calm helps to find better solutions. Since no two cases are ever the same; therefore, I enjoy anticipating unforeseen problems. We are always open for every new challenging situation and facing it with patience, courage and innovation. The power of co-operation is much stronger than fighting alone and this belief only makes success real and practical. Reading the success stories of individual lawyers who have made a mark for themselves on their own, new young lawyers are now willing to take up litigation as their career option, which requires a far fetching struggle and patience. I was also motivated and ignited by such stories. The ignite still burns and helps to keep on going further.
Q. What do you think is the toughest responsibility of a lawyer?
A. A legal professional in the beginning has to face severe remarks from the seniors and burn the midnight oil to gather in-depth knowledge of law before defending the client and to satiate the client’s greed to avail justice within the stipulated time. A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. As advocate, a lawyer zealously asserts the client’s position under the rules of the adversary system. As negotiator, a lawyer seeks a result advantageous to the client but consistent with requirements of honest dealings with others. As an evaluator, a lawyer acts by examining a client’s legal affairs and reporting about them to the client or to others. Compassion is the foundation for good professional skills. A compassionate lawyer focuses on how others feel and is accepting of their perspective, whether or not he ultimate agrees with it. Without compassion, you cannot put yourself in your client’s shoes or fully understand the issues your client is confronting. Without compassion and proper knowledge, you cannot provide the best solutions or rather impactful solutions.
With changing times, and power and money pouring in the profession, A lawyer should remember to only use the law and related practices for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials. It is the professional responsibility of every lawyer to be creative to find real solutions to the issues the clients face. Each matter is unique; each client must be handled differently, and each solution carefully crafted. Lawyers must learn to think outside the box to achieve success. Nowadays, sometimes people say a lawyer should not be aggressive. I have a different opinion; lawyers are required to be aggressive and impatient. It is natural for them to be aggressive as they are fighting for justice and awaiting the delivery of the justice to his client. I read in an article, in which Justice Chadrachud also endorsed a similar view.
The legal profession is largely self-governing. Self-regulation helps maintain the legal profession’s independence from government domination. An independent legal profession is an important force in preserving government under law, for abuse of legal authority is more readily challenged by a profession whose members are not dependent on government for the right to practice.ry
By – Priya Chaudhary