Reminiscences

Hon’ble Mr Justice R.N. Gurtu

Former Judge, High Court , Allahabad

My First recollection of the Allahabad High Court is of a boy, when my father, and Advocate of the Court, took me, at what must have been my insistence, to the Advocate’s Association. It was a day of great excitement, because on that day Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya had received a letter asking approval to his appointment as a member of the Industrial Commission, of which Sir Thomas Holland was to be the Chairman. The question was being discussed whether Malaviyaji should accept it. He was then in flourishing practice and it was felt that as he was one of those who took his work seriously, it would interfere with his practice. Malaviyaji never put self before public duty. Realizing the importance of industrial development, for the future of his country, he opted for the membership. Gopinath Kunzru who later became one of the leaders of the Allahabad Bar, was selected by Malaviyaji as his Secretary. In a sense from that time onwards Malaviyaji's interest in his profession lessened, and more and more he devoted himself to public causes; the Banaras Hindu University, he built up; and; he reached the apex of recognition in Indian politics when he became the President of the Indian National Congress.

When I myself joined the Bar in the twenties after being called by the Inner Temple in England, naturally I became a member of the Bar Library of the Allahabad High Court. This was a legal association of English Barristers ¾ meaning those who had qualified in England for the Bar. By the time I joined, there were many of us Indians who were members. But there was still a sprinkling of English men. Of these, Sir Charles Alston was the most popular, and, indeed, he was quite a personality. Hardly five feet in height, he constantly smoked a longish cigar; in fact, the cigar, which was smoked by him from the wrong end, was considered by us, the youngsters, as his trade mark. He had piquant sense of humour, and a great sense of repartee. There are stories about him. But on I can authenticate for it was confirmed by Sir Tej Sapru. Once Alston and Sir Tej were going to some District Court, each for his case, came together on the platform. All first classes were occupied, except one marked for European Ladies. Alston stepped into it and asked Sir Tej do likewise. Along the way came an Anglo-Indian ticket collector. Surprised at seeing two males in a women’s compartment, he politely pointed to the words written on the compartment door and then there followed this conversation ¾

TC ¾ Sir (pointing to the door).

Alston ¾I see it.

TC¾It is for ladies.

Alston¾How do you know I am not a lady?

TC¾This gentleman.

Alston¾He is my boy friend.

The Anglo-Indian ticket collector never faced such a phenomenon looked aghast. But Alston was European and so he just said ‘All right, Sir’. I know it for a fact that the TC discussed it with other as to ‘how a person so obviously male could be a female.’ Of course, there was the other point: an Indian boy friend in the hey day of British Imperialism!

O’Coner, who practised on the civil side was a different type. He was a painstaking lawyer. He was engaged as one who knew his civil law and who diligently marshalled the facts. It was not a case of being engaged because the Judges were British. He was an able Advocate. O’Coner was a bachelor. There was a romantic story about him but there was never a full confirmation. But if true this was not the first case where the lady whose case the lawyer had argued, was so charmed that the lawyer won both the case and the Lady’s hand. I have heard of quite a few such tales, particularly from Oudh.

One more Barrister was¾Guy Ponsonby Boys¾the name itself startles one. He practised on the criminal side and was raised to the Bench. He was considered a pain in the neck by the Bar; and, Alston, who had the most brilliant mind, and he, never got on together. On one occasion, I happened to be Alston’s junior and this was the scene: it was the case of a jeweller, a case of cheating, about mixture of gold, whether there was a greater mix of alloy than represented. In point of fact on this point the preponderance of evidence was in favour of the jeweller. Alston put the case in a nutshell, and then said, “My Lord, I will now place the evidence of the most important export witness,” where upon, Justice Boys remarked, “Mr. Alston, when was the first information report made.” Thereupon, Alston thrust the brief into my hands and said, “You go on” I was a mere junior. When the Judge wanted some other irrelevant fact, as Alston thought, he turned to me and said sufficiently loudly: “Rub it in, he will never understand.” Whereupon, Justice Boys, who had undoubtedly overhead the remark and was livid, said: “Sir Charles would you please repeat what you said.” His answer “I was instructing my junior, My Lord; he will follow my instruction.” We, of course, won the case in the end.

I have talked about the English Barristers. No doubt our High Court is a continuity in a sense, from the English Courts. When I first joined it, in one or two courts there was little difference of atmosphere and presentation from what I had seen and heard in the High Court in England. Take the Court of Sir Grimwood Mears and his brother Judge, usually from the Indian Wing. It’s half a minute to ten, the Jamadar pulls the curtain, the entry, and as they sat, you could see that it was exactly Ten. Before they sat, bowed deeply to the Bar and that courtesy was returned. Let us take a case¾Motilal Nehru and Sir Tej are counsel. Upon remand from the Privy council. The grace of Motilalji’s argument, the elegant phrasing, the logicality, the analysis, not a harsh tone or a raising of the voice¾many time the words"¾If it pleases your Lordship¾May I submit¾If your Lordship is pleased to look at page so and so” The intensity of the concentration of the Judges. The points are tricky, Hindu law and concepts of estates; limited and otherwise. Then Sir Tej replies. There have been few jurists of his eminence in India or elsewhere, his tracing of the structure, his build up, that powerful resounding voice. I can still hear it reverberate in the corridors of the High Court. Every question put by the Court: courteously, accurately phrased, no ad hoc incoherency. The whole scene, not only in this Court but in others stands imprinted on my memory. I was but a junior. Then when I became a Judge, I always remembered that standard. Did I maintain, at least the civility if not the erudition? Who can say, not I ?

Let me now talk about Sir Sunderlal. I was still young when he died. In fact I was in school. I remember the school was closed. I had heard a lot about him. Here is what I heard. He had a tremendous memory. You asked for a case on a point¾he gave it, substance, page, even paragraph. No wonder at his height, with Motilal, he shared the top briefs. You will find it from the law reports. It was a Motilal-Sunderlal court: the first appeal court. Those days few cases were listed but these were disposed. For first appeal there was an A B C list: three to four first appeals under each, fixed for specific dates and the half finished taken over and finally completed next day and in most cases short pithy judgments delivered on the spot.

One Motilalji had gone to Mussoorie for the summer vacations. I was also there. The Court had opened a couple of days earlier¾no first appeals were listed immediately after the vacations. Motilalji was still in Mussoorie. I was surprised. Motilalji said, “After all it is either myself or Sunderlal so far as first appeals go. If I stay back I will get the respondent briefs, let Sunderlal sweat and draw up appeal grounds.”

Let me deal with personal characteristics of a few. Let me take Sunderlalji. Of rather heavy build, always dressed, not very neatly, in Indian attire, Sunderlalji static, over serious, engrossed in his job and his extra curricular activities. He was virtually out of politics and so was able to enter many spheres of activity, particularly education. It was well known that he lived austerely. It was said by the junior Bar, who greatly admired his plain living and high thinking, and quite humorously and no maliciously (of course it is not true), that his clerks could not explain the expense account to the clients because out of that money he had to meet Sunderlalji’s household expenses. On the other hand, I have it also, from sources that knew, of his charitable disposition and his helpfulness to those who needed it. Talking about this little whim, Peareylal Banerjee was another case. Now it is perfectly true that he opened pasted envelopes very carefully and much of his written work was scribed on the back of these envelopes; and, in one case, somebody saw a written opinion which was on the unwritten inner side of a big envelope. But let me complete the picture of Peareylal Banerjee: and, find a leg pull; he had a few juniors whom he liked and they all lunched at the same table. Justice Douglas Young was in the Allahabad High Court. He went as Chief Justice to Lahore. There he dealt with the liquidation matter of Harikishanlal’s bank. He asked Peareylal Banerjee to take up the case. And at this point his junior colleagues had their say. He was taken to a leading tailor and fitted with striped trousers and a well-cut black coat before he was allowed to go to Lahore. There is a wicked concoction about the bill¾eventually Peareylal Banerjee consented to pay half the tailoring charges. But don’t let me put you on the wrong track. Peareylal Banerjee had an excellent kitchen. He liked English food and his Goanese cook still functions at his daughter-in-law’s house and is still frequently in demand by those who wish to garnish their table with English delicacies. Le me tell you, Peareylal Banerjee spoke the most perfect English, he reached the standard of diction of the best of the King’s Bench Division. His reading of law was wide, and he delighted in citing cases from the English Courts. In fact once Dr. Katju said to me “The trouble with Pearey is, that he is in love with words”. This elegance of diction was also a gift that was of Uma Shanker Bajpai. He was Government Advocate and a Judge of the Court. When you mention Pearellal Banerjee you also come to Dr. Katju. It was also like Motilal Sunderlal, a case of Pearey and Katju. Katju was most parsimonious both in the use of words and of arguments. In point of fact, I sometimes noticed a lack of elegance in his style and he never spoke more than essential English. But he was a deadly shot, never missed the mark. Ten minutes of Katju and the result was in. Katju was full hearted to those he liked. Otherwise, he kept very much to himself. Professional success did not go to his head, and he maintained simple manners and modes throughout. He dressed poorly, never very elegant, he had a rough exterior, but, for all that, no one knew of his charitable disposition. He was a fond father, his mother’s darling; After a period of ambivalence, Katju came down on the right side of patriotism, self-sacrifice; and, finally capping the climax of a top practice with a reputation of a clean, impartial administrator. For he held the highest executive posts in the land.

There are two ways of life, a well defined path and a ramblers roamings. I am in accord with my nature, in rambling in the way I am doing. But I would like to come back to Sir Tej. If you ask me: “What was particular about Sir Tej”. I will reply, “What was not”. You had only to see his library, a store house of vast erudition and he knew what was in those books. Except perhaps for science, art and music, his mind took in all cultures: the humanities, poetry for instance, English, but Urdu above all. In the limited possibilities of Allahabad, he held Court, surrounded by poets, many were the mushairas organized; poet member of the Bar: there were two in particular: Majid ali and Tirbhuwan Agha.

Sir Tej kept an open house, it was not an ordinary atmosphere; it could not be, he attracted ability and those who wished to be in touch with the deeper currents of politics and of life gravitated towards him.

This is a glimpse, just a glimpse, of the Court and some of the men: the Judges and the members of the Bar of the past!

When I now enter the Court’s marble hall this panorama unfolds before me. In this great institution I spent the best part of my working life. Did I play any worthwhile part?

What greater fortune, can a man have than to be able to worship in this temple of justice.’