February 7, 2014

Arguing Methods : Venugopal Method And Nambiar Method

Once I heard about these two methods from Senior Advocate M.N,Krishnamani in Supreme Court.

K K Venugopal is one of the top senior advocate of India. His father Nambiar was also a great advocate.

M. N. Krishnamani once in a meeting of few advocates, described difference in method of arguments of these two - father and son.

Nambiar will prepare a case for 15 days and he would argue his case for 15 minutes.

K. K. Venugopal will prepare a case for 15 minutes and then he can keep on arguing for 15 days.

Both methods of arguments are good and valid. One method is about brevity. About compressing tonnes of facts and law in a capsule form. Another method is about elaborating on a proposition of law. This requires lot of imagination. You have to contemplate large number of human situations where this proposition of law is going to be applied.

Both methods are valuable.

A lawyer can evolve his own method of arguing as per his own temperament and as per needs of his case.

Earlier advocates were independent. They liked to do all work by themselves.

Modern advocates are interdependent. They delegate many of their functions to their junior advocates, colleagues and staff. They like to have more free time.

One top advocate of Gujarat, namely I. M. Nanavati, was said to have a peculiar method.

After studying a case, he will sit alone in his chamber. He will turn on soft music in background and will relax completely.

After half an hour, he would have come up with a solution to crack even a toughest case.

This method has also its advantages.

Haresh Raichura
1182