the essay of 13 May 2020 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <title>Untitled Document</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">MAY 13, 2020 </font></strong></p> <p align="center"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Learned Counsel, not Counsels </strong></font></p> <p align="center"><u><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>By Vijay Kumar </strong></font></u></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>RECENTLY</STRONG>, in the CESTAT, a Member was dictating an order. He dictated, <em>"the learned <font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> representing the appellants …."</em> The other Member intervened and said, <em>"the learned counsel…"</em> The first member said, "<em>there are many of them" </em>and he continued his dictation, <em>"the learned <font color="#FF0000">counsel</font>s…".</em> The other Member again said, <em>"the learned counsel"</em>, but the first Member was in no mood to understand that two or more lawyers together are also called <em> counsel</em>, <font color="#FF0000">not <em>counsels</em></font>. The other Member gave up in exasperation. Obviously, the Member who knew this, corrected his brother Member after they retired to their chambers, because finally when the order came, it was, <em>"the learned counsel"</em> and not <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font></em>. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Counsel may be either singular or plural. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Garner's Dictionary of Legal Usage </em> states, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em><font color="#FF0000">Counsels</font> </em> is sometimes mistakenly used as a plural of counsel-especially when nonlawyers are writing about the law. Part of this tendency comes from the popularization of the phrases independent counsel and general counsel. At the federal level, there are occasionally calls for an independent counsel to be appointed. And if two are needed, the tendency is to say two independent counsels. </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But I find that more lawyers and judges use <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> instead of counsel, than nonlawyers. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>"The Essentials of English Grammar Composition"</em> says, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Counsel (in the sense of a barrister) has the same form in the singular and the plural. But when it is used in the singular, we have to say counsel instead of a counsel. <em>He has engaged counsel ( not a counsel ) to defend his case</em>. Again, when it is used in the plural, we have to say counsel instead of counsels. He has engaged two counsel (not, counsels) to defend his case. <em>'The second of our three counsel was the best." </em></font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Fowler's Modem English Usage </em> asserts that counsel is a barrister or other legal adviser and the plural is unchanged. As an example, it states, <em>"K. began the defence of his client with public sympathy but under immense difficulties against five prosecuting counsel."</em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, it's counsel, not counsels, even if there are many of them. But lawyers and judges use <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> more than anyone else. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court in <strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=MTU0Njg5" target="_blank">2019-TIOL-517-SC-GST</a></strong> heard the learned <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> appearing for the parties. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=MTU0MjA3" target="_blank">2019-TIOL-495-SC-MISC-CB</a></strong>, the Supreme Court observed, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Learned <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> vehemently placed reliance on the Constituent Assembly Debates.. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A nuanced argument was also furthered by petitioners' <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> who highlighted… </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nearly sixty years ago in <strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=50&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-260-SC-CT-CB.htm" target="_blank">2002-TIOL-260-SC-CT-CB</a></strong>, the Supreme Court noted, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">These exceptions having been conceded by learned <em><font color="#FF0000">Counsels</font> </em> for the respondent, it is sufficient if attention is confined to the question, </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <strong><a href="http://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MjQ5NDQ=" target="_blank">F.NO.390/Misc/116/2017-JC</a></strong>, dated October 17, 2018, the CBIC directed the Chief Commissioners that 'Panel <em><font color="#FF0000">Counsels</font> </em> may also be adequately briefed.' </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A Budget provision has been explained as, "Provision is for Law Officers, Legal Advisers and <em><font color="#FF0000">Counsels</font> </em> of the Department of Legal Affairs. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A leading tax law firm in its analysis of the 2020 union budget solemnly stated, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There is a lack of coordination among tax authorities in relation to pending tax cases because most of the times, the arguing <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> are not briefed appropriately; Selection of arguing <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em>also does not always happen on merits. </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em><font color="#FF0000">Counsels</font> </em>have sneaked into the GST law also. In a recent case, <strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=MTU4MjI0" target="_blank">2020-TIOL-900-HC-DEL-GST</a></strong>, the Delhi High Court observed, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nevertheless, since the respondents fervently contest the petitions, we permitted the learned <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em>to make elaborate submissions as we feel that an authoritative decision is necessary to put the controversy to rest. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Learned <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em>for the petitioners have strongly relied upon the judgement.. </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">During this lockdown, all our counsel are busy with webinars and WhatsApp messages fully sharing their abundant knowledge and I am fortunately invited to many such online affairs by 'senior <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font></em>'. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We are perhaps coming to an end of the strict lockdown period and in the relaxed lockdown ahead, a huge amount of 20 lakh crores of rupees will be pumped into the economy and this will certainly create situations requiring the wise counsel of our large number of highly learned counsel. I hope all the counsel are prepared for this and wiser counsel will prevail. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But what is wrong if two or more lawyers are called <em><font color="#FF0000">counsels</font> </em> and not the illogical <em>counsel </em>? Well, that's how the language has been made, just like the laws! If you want to change it, you can as well do so. Counsel or counsels - what's in a name, what matters is litigation and as long as that is provided in abundant measure, why bother? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Counsel rest. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong> </strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Until next week </strong></font></p> </body> </html>