Courtroom Exchange: "Why you take a short cut?"

Courtroom Exchange chronicles those observations made by judges and lawyers in court that do not make it to official orders. A gallery view of wit, gravitas, the truth, and nothing but the truth.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher of the Delhi High Court today was prompted to comment on the dynamic role played by lawyers while juggling different cases.

Amid hearing, the Judge pointed out to a counsel:

"When you appear for plaintiff you say something, for the defendant (in another case) you say something else. Unfortunately, the only person who has to be consistent in the system is the judge."

When silence greeted the Karnataka High Court as it looked for a counsel representing the State Education department, it did little to improve the Court's waning impression of the department itself.

"Is there anyone from the Education Department? If there is, they will get it from us", the Court remarked.

With no counsel answering the Court's call, the Judge added,

"This is typical of educational institutions to harass lecturers/teachers. I have also been a lawyer."

A lawyer's prayer to dismiss a case before Justice N Sathish Kumar of the Madras High Court for a misjoinder of parties today saw the Judge advising the young counsel to take the case as a learning opportunity instead.

Remarking that the Court cannot dismiss a case only for the misjoinder of parties, Justice Kumar said,

"As a young lawyer, when you contest the suit, you learn a lot of things. Why you take a short cut? ... You should see it as a chance to learn so many things."

A lawyer's inadvertent slip of the tongue while pronouncing Justice M Sathyanarayanan's name during a hearing before another Bench sitting at Madurai prompted the Madras High Court to orally remark in a lighter vein,

"Don’t make 'Sathyanarayanan' into 'Sathyanarayana' and make him a Telugu man, he is a Tamil man."

"I see him as an Indian", the lawyer quipped.

All the same, there are States, the High court responded, remarking further that "'N' makes a difference."

The same hearing also saw the Bench lament about the numerous and successive typesets that courts have to deal with.

"The easiest way to confuse the judges is to file as many typesets as possible... We (judges) are poor souls searching for the facts", the High Court remarked.