Sharma & Associates

09/06/2026

The finest advocates are not those who lose their temper the least, but those who preserve their professionalism the most.

As advocates, we are often faced with difficult situations in courtrooms—heated arguments, aggressive opponents, impatient litigants, unexpected observations, or even adverse orders.

Yet, one quality distinguishes a true professional from the rest:

The ability to remain well-mannered and composed, regardless of the circumstances.

An advocate's strength is not measured by the volume of his voice, but by the clarity of his arguments.

Courtesy is not weakness. Respect is not surrender. Professionalism is not compromise.

A lawyer who remains calm under pressure is better able to:
✔ Think clearly
✔ Present arguments effectively
✔ Earn the confidence of the Court
✔ Build a strong professional reputation

Courts remember advocates who assist in the administration of justice with dignity and decorum. Clients also place greater trust in lawyers who display maturity, patience, and self-control.

In the long run, legal knowledge may get you noticed, but character and conduct determine how far you will go in the profession.

As officers of the Court, we must always remember:

"Advocacy is not merely about winning cases; it is also about upholding the dignity of the legal profession."

What are your thoughts? Have you witnessed situations where courtesy achieved more than confrontation?

08/06/2026

"CONSENSUAL PREMARITAL RELATIONSHIP CANNOT BY ITSELF REFLECT POOR CHARACTER"

"Supreme Court: Compromise in Criminal Case Does Not Mean Admission of Guilt"

In a significant judgment delivered on 21 May 2026, the Supreme Court in Gajula Thirupathi v. Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board (Civil Appeal No. 8059 of 2026) set aside the cancellation of a police constable candidate's selection and made important observations on both public employment and changing social realities.

The case arose from a criminal complaint filed following the breakdown of a long-standing relationship between two adults. The matter was subsequently settled before a Lok Adalat, yet the candidate's appointment was denied on the ground that he had been involved in an offence allegedly involving moral turpitude.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment:

✅ A consensual premarital physical relationship between two unmarried adults cannot, by itself, be treated as a reflection of poor character.

✅ There is no law prohibiting two consenting adults from maintaining a relationship of their choice.

✅ Compromise of a criminal case before a Lok Adalat does not amount to an admission of guilt.

✅ Mere registration of an FIR or filing of a charge-sheet does not establish that the allegations are true.

✅ Authorities cannot draw adverse conclusions based on assumptions, moral perceptions, or untested allegations.

✅ While assessing suitability for public employment, particularly in disciplined forces, decisions must be based on objective material and not conjecture.

The Court observed that:

"Physical relationship between two consenting unmarried adults cannot and should not by itself be a ground to draw an adverse impression about the character of the person in that relationship."

Equally important is the Court's rejection of the assumption that compromise necessarily implies guilt. The judgment emphasizes that fairness, evidence, and constitutional values must prevail over stereotypes and moral presumptions.

This decision is likely to have a significant impact on service law jurisprudence, character verification cases, police recruitment disputes, and matters involving criminal antecedents.

08/06/2026

Respond, Don't React: A Lesson Every Advocate Must Master

One of the most valuable distinctions I recently came across while reading The Art of Persuasion by Bob Burg is the difference between responding and reacting.

As Bob Burg recounts from Zig Ziglar's wisdom:

> "To respond is positive; to react is negative."

For advocates, this distinction is not merely philosophical—it is a daily professional necessity.

Consider a few common courtroom and client situations:

⚖️ When opposing counsel makes a provocative remark

A reaction is immediate, emotional, and often counterproductive.

A response is measured, strategic, and focused on advancing the client's case.

⚖️ When a judge expresses an adverse view

A reaction may lead to frustration or unnecessary confrontation.

A response involves calmly addressing the concern through facts, law, and precedent.

⚖️ When a client is upset or unreasonable

A reaction escalates the conflict.

A response builds trust and preserves the professional relationship.

The finest advocates understand that persuasion is rarely achieved through emotional outbursts. It is achieved through composure, preparation, and thoughtful communication.

In litigation, the person who remains calm often gains a significant advantage over the person who loses control.

As lawyers, we cannot always control: ✔ The judge's observations
✔ The opponent's conduct
✔ The client's emotions

But we can always control our own response.

Perhaps that is one of the most underrated advocacy skills:

Reacting is instinctive. Responding is professional.

And in the practice of law, professionalism almost always outperforms impulse.

05/06/2026

क्या वैवाहिक संबंधों से लगातार इंकार करना 'क्रूरता' है? — सुप्रीम कोर्ट का महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय

हाल ही में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने Sonal Talpada v. Veerbhan Singh (2026) मामले में एक महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय दिया है, जिसमें यह दोहराया गया कि यदि पति या पत्नी बिना उचित कारण के लगातार वैवाहिक (Conjugal) संबंधों से इंकार करते हैं, तो यह मानसिक क्रूरता (Mental Cruelty) माना जा सकता है और तलाक का आधार बन सकता है।

न्यायालय ने कहा कि विवाह केवल एक कानूनी बंधन नहीं है, बल्कि यह विश्वास, साथ, भावनात्मक सहयोग और पारस्परिक दायित्वों पर आधारित एक साझेदारी है। वैवाहिक अधिकारों के साथ-साथ वैवाहिक कर्तव्यों का निर्वहन भी आवश्यक है।

इस निर्णय की प्रमुख बातें:

✅ बिना उचित कारण के लंबे समय तक शारीरिक संबंधों से इंकार मानसिक क्रूरता हो सकता है।

✅ वर्षों तक अलग-अलग रहना और पुनर्मिलन के लिए कोई वास्तविक प्रयास न करना भी क्रूरता का रूप ले सकता है।

✅ अपीलीय न्यायालय मुकदमे की लंबी अवधि के दौरान उत्पन्न परिस्थितियों को भी ध्यान में रख सकता है।

✅ यदि विवाह व्यवहारिक रूप से समाप्त हो चुका हो और पुनर्मिलन की कोई संभावना न हो, तो केवल कानूनी रूप से विवाह को जीवित रखना दोनों पक्षों के लिए पीड़ादायक हो सकता है।

यह निर्णय पारिवारिक कानून के क्षेत्र में महत्वपूर्ण है और यह दर्शाता है कि न्यायालय केवल कानूनी औपचारिकताओं तक सीमित नहीं है, बल्कि वैवाहिक संबंधों की वास्तविक स्थिति को भी महत्व देता है।

कानून का उद्देश्य केवल विवाह को बनाए रखना नहीं, बल्कि न्याय सुनिश्चित करना भी है।

01/06/2026

Before buying any property, always ask one important question:

"Is there any court case pending regarding this property?"
The answer could make all the difference.

This is where the legal doctrine of Lis Pendens comes into play which is contained in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

In simple terms, it means that if a property is already the subject matter of a court dispute, any transfer of that property during the pendency of the case will remain subject to the final outcome of the litigation.
For example:
Mr. A files a suit claiming ownership of a house.
While the case is pending, the owner sells the house to Mr. B.
If the court later decides that Mr. A's claim is valid, Mr. B cannot avoid the effect of that judgment merely because he was not an original party to the suit.
The law treats the transfer as being subject to the court's final decision.

Why does the law do this?
Because if disputed properties could be freely transferred during litigation, court proceedings would become meaningless. Parties could defeat judicial orders simply by selling the property to someone else.

Section 52 protects the integrity of the judicial process and ensures that the rights being adjudicated by the court are not frustrated by transfers made during the pendency of the case.

Practical Takeaway
✔ Before purchasing any property, conduct proper due diligence.
✔ Verify whether any civil suit, specific performance suit, partition suit, or ownership dispute is pending.
✔ Remember: A registered sale deed does not always guarantee a dispute-free title.

How many property buyers actually check for pending litigation before signing the sale deed? Probably far fewer than they should. A few hours spent on legal verification can save years of litigation.

Section 52, Transfer of Property Act, 1882: A small provision with enormous consequences in property transactions.

18/05/2026

Litigation is not just a profession.
It is a journey of courage, responsibility, and constant growth.

Every courtroom teaches you something — patience, preparation, discipline, and the power of standing firm for what is right.

As advocates, we do more than argue cases.
We protect rights, resolve conflicts, and become a voice for those who seek justice.

The black coat carries pressure, long hours, and challenges — but it also carries dignity, purpose, and immense respect.

Proud to be part of this empowering profession.

— Adv Vishal Sharma

DelhiLawyer

18/05/2026

PROPERTY LITIGATION IS CHANGING. ⚖️

A recent judgment by the Supreme Court of India has once again reminded lawyers of one powerful principle:

“Substance matters more than clever drafting.”

The Court discussed:
✔️ Order VII Rule 11 CPC
✔️ Benami property disputes
✔️ Fiduciary relationship
✔️ Rejection of frivolous suits
✔️ Meaningful reading of pleadings

Big takeaway for litigators:
A case cannot survive merely because it is smartly drafted. Courts will look at the REAL nature of the dispute.

For every property lawyer, this judgment is worth studying carefully.

⚖️ Law is strategy.
⚖️ Litigation is clarity.
⚖️ Drafting is responsibility.

17/04/2026

08/03/2026

02/03/2026

#होली