India, Nov. 21 -- Law catches up, they say. In my case, it was I who caught up with the law. Insulated from the civvie humdrum for 27 years while in the army, I was exposed to the ways of life when our hither to fore nice tenant flatly refused to vacate our house. An ex-army friend and a neighbour put me wise, "There is a provision in the law which facilitates immediate vacation of your premises required for personal use. Go ahead and file a case. Remember, it needs to be filed within a year of retirement." And it was the eleventh month running! I sent a message through my mother to the reticent tenant for a rethink before I approach the court. The request was declined and the lady (the tenant's wife) rubbed salt into the wounds by indicating their closeness to the law: "Mrs Sharma, today a judge has called us over to dinner so kindly excuse me, I'm in a hurry." I set things in motion and in no time the lower court ruled in our favour. Not one to give up easily, our tenant approached the high court and that was the first time I went to a courtroom for a hearing. The opposing lawyer came up with a plea: "My Lord, the house does not belong to the respondent. The ownership documents are fabricated." It was clearly a delaying tactic with an intention to make the system get involved in the rigmarole of authentication. The judge was proactive, having done his homework. "Mr X (the lawyer), a similar plea was stated in the lower court and was dismissed. Please stop wasting the court's time." The lawyer was ready with the next plea: "My client has been staying in this house for 13 years. It is a big house. Why can't they be allowed to carry on for another year before my client builds one of his own?" The judge, by now clearly disillusioned by the professional competence of the learned counsel, remarked, "Mr X, the house, big or small, belongs to the respondent. Do you know what a soldier's life is? They literally live out of bed rolls throughout their uniformed service. Don't they have a right to look forward to a settled life in their own property after retirement?" This impassionate statement by the judge left the courtroom speechless and my heart swell with pride. The case was adjourned for the second hearing-cum-judgment for the next week. The speedy procedure left me pleasantly surprised in the light of a common impression to the contrary. We collected in the courtroom the following week. Their lawyer tried to bring up some more frivolous arguments but was contested with prudence. The observant judge sensed my presence in the court and asked, "Colonel Saab, how much time can you give your tenant of 13 years to vacate your house?" Taken aback, I stood up and replied, "Sir, would three months be okay?" The judge smiled, "I appreciate your magnanimity even in distress. That's like a soldier." And he announced the judgment, "Case dismissed. Tenant to vacate in 30 days from the date of judgment. Next case, please." This was my first and only tryst with the court of law and I knew the citadel of justice was in safe and competent hands. The honourable judge, justice Surya Kant, is set to take over as the 53rd Chief Justice of India on November 24....