A well-known person in the realm of law, Nani Palkhivala is often referred to as the “crusader of rights.” No other lawyer has attained such meteoric success in the profession. Many anecdotes from his friends and colleagues about what made him so successful have been told, but the following three are particularly telling because they reveal the qualities that made him so successful.
Clutch
Opportunities multiply when they are seized; they die when neglected.
– Nani Palkhivala (Jignesh R. Shah, The Wit and Wisdom of Nani A. Palkhivala)
In the book, Nani Palkhivala: The Courtroom Genius, Behram Palkhivala describes an episode that acted as a turning point in Nani Palkhivala’s life. Palkhivala was a junior at Kanga’s Chambers, alongside R.J. Kolah, Mistry, and Seervai. In 1948, when this incident took place, the Constitution was not yet in effect. The Petitioner filed a writ of certiorari in the Bombay High Court under the Specific Relief Act of 1877. Palkhivala assisted R.J. Kolah, who represented the Petitioner. Following the conclusion of R.J. Kolah and the Advocate General’s respective arguments, the judge set the matter for R.J. Kolah’s rejoinder the following day. Because of his involvement in a different matter, R.J. Kolah asked Palkhivala to continue the arguments on his behalf.
The central question in the case was whether a writ of certiorari may be issued against a Provincial Government. Three Madras High Court decisions and one Calcutta High Court decision had previously held that a writ of certiorari would not lie against the Provincial Government. Nani Palkhivala had the monumental challenge of proving otherwise.
Even though Palkhivala had only been practicing law for two years, he was given an opportunity to make a real impact and he clutched it. According to what is said in the book, Palkhivala did not get any sleep the night before the hearing, and when the matter came up, he presented a compelling argument and managed to convince the court that a writ of certiorari would lie against the Provincial Government.
This event proved to be a significant moment in his professional life, but everything would have been for naught if he hadn’t responded to it in the manner that he did.
Correction
In a convocation speech addressing the fresh graduates as ‘my fellow students’: I call you fellow students because, I hope, I have not stopped learning.
– Nani Palkhivala (Jignesh R. Shah, The Wit and Wisdom of Nani A. Palkhivala)
In his book, “The Legend of Nani Palkhivala,” M.R. Pai recounts a story that highlights Palkhivala’s great quality of being able to admit when he was wrong and learn as a result of his experiences.
Palkhivala had expressed an opinion on an important topic. Due to his status as a major corporate figure, his opinion was given wide acclaim and seldom questioned within the business community. This specific instance, which took place in a public organization for which he served as President, was a little bit different from the others.
One of the assistants in the secretariat who dealt with problems pertaining to excise brought to the Secretary’s attention the fact that Nani Palkhivala’s viewpoints were not accurate. The Secretary of the organisation hesitatingly told Palkhivala about it. Palkhivala, being as eager to learn as he was, quickly summoned the assistant and inquired as to why he had a different opinion. When the assistant explained the reasons, Palkhivala was convinced. He accepted the assistant’s view and thanked the assistant for correcting him.
Clarity
Your education has been in vain if it has not fostered in you the habit of clear, independent thinking. There are well dressed foolish ideas, just as there well-dressed fools, and the discerning man must be able to recognize them as such.
– Nani Palkhivala (Jignesh R. Shah, The Wit and Wisdom of Nani A. Palkhivala)
Bansi S. Mehta, who reminisces about Palkhivala in the documentary Nani – The Crusader, reRects on how he would use his clear thinking and boil down complex issues to their most basic elements.
Mr. Mehta mentioned that Palkhivala avoided technicalities and concentrated on the main point. He spoke of the time the government had declared that radio is not a form of communication because there was a tax concession given to the communication industry. So Mr. Mehta went to Palkhivala, and he agreed to appear.
At the outset, Nani Palkhivala posed the question, “What is communication?” He remarked that in the opinion of the tax department, the act of reading a newspaper does not qualify as communication. Why? Simply because when you are reading a newspaper, you are unable to argue with the editor. So, the tax department was essentially saying that there must be at least two persons involved in any kind of communication.
Palkhivala then argued that if the view of the tax department is accepted then except for telephone nothing else would qualify as communication. That was it! That was how a problem that had come from the Estimates Committee in parliament was resolved in just ten minutes.
Conclusion
Insatiable in his quest for knowledge, a prolific writer, and a lifelong devotee of personal growth. Nani Palkhivala was a towering figure in the field of law, and there is a great deal that can be learned by examining both his body of work and his life. After all, only by standing on the shoulders of giants can we see the far summit that lies ahead.
YLCC would like to thank Pearl Narang for her valuable contribution in penning this article.
