Plain language drafting

Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance · Unit I · Topic 3 of 19 · 5 min read

Why legal writing should be readable, the techniques that make it so without changing its legal effect, what plain language must not do, and worked redrafts of a statutory provision, a deed clause and a pleading paragraph.

← All Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance topics

On this page

1. Why it matters
2. The techniques
3. What plain language must not do
4. Worked redrafts
5. A short method for every redraft
How this is examined

Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

Clear is not the same as casual. Plain language drafting keeps the legal effect of a text and changes only how it is said, so that the person bound by it can understand it. The revised scheme requires at least five exercises that re-draft or annotate a sample text “to improve clarity and citizen comprehensibility”. In each, the test is the same: same law, fewer obstacles for the reader.

1. Why it matters

Legal texts are read by people who must obey them, pay under them or rely on them: a tenant, a borrower, a farmer reading a land notification, a citizen reading a penal provision. A provision that cannot be understood produces disputes, defeats rights (a notice nobody follows gives no real chance to object) and sits uneasily with the rule that ignorance of the law is no excuse. The objectives in the KSLU syllabus speak of promoting “clarity, precision and accessibility for citizens and institutions”.

Plain language is not a loss of precision. Most legalese is not precise; it is old. “Null and void and of no effect whatsoever” says no more than “void”.

2. The techniques

Know the reader and write for the least expert person who must act on the text.
Put the main point first. State the rule, then the exceptions, then the procedure.
Short sentences, one idea each. Break a sentence with several conditions into a list.
Active voice and a named actor. “The landlord must repair” rather than “repairs shall be carried out”.
Verbs, not nouns. “Decide” rather than “make a determination”; “apply” rather than “make an application”.
Drop doublets and triplets: “give, devise and bequeath”, “cease and desist”, “fit and proper”, unless each word has a separate legal job.
Drop archaic words: hereinafter, hereinbefore, aforesaid, witnesseth, the said. Use a defined short name instead.
Lists and headings for conditions and steps, with numbered items.
Avoid multiple negatives (“no person shall not be ineligible”).
Use examples, as Indian statutes do through illustrations.
Use “must” for duties where the style allows. Many modern drafting manuals prefer it to “shall”, which is overused and sometimes means “will” or “may”. In a Bill, follow the house style of the legislature, which in India is still “shall”.

3. What plain language must not do

Change the law. If a word is a term of art (“cognizable”, “mortgage by deposit of title deeds”, “attested”), keep it and explain it if needed. Replacing it may change the legal effect.
Drop a condition or an exception in the interest of brevity.
Drop the statutory words of a form where the law prescribes them, such as the verification of a pleading under Order VI Rule 15 of the CPC.
Become vague. “Soon” is plain but not precise. “Within 15 days” is both.

4. Worked redrafts

Illustrative exercise 1: a statutory provision.

Original: “Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, no application for the grant of a licence under this section shall be entertained by the licensing authority unless the same is accompanied by such fee as may be prescribed and unless the applicant has furnished such particulars as the licensing authority may by order require.”

Redraft: “(1) An application for a licence must be accompanied by (a) the prescribed fee; and (b) the particulars that the licensing authority requires by order. (2) The licensing authority must not consider an application that does not meet sub-section (1).”

Annotation: the non obstante clause was removed because nothing else in the Act conflicted with the provision; the two conditions were separated into a list; the duty is placed on a named actor; “the same” is gone. The legal effect is unchanged.

Illustrative exercise 2: a lease clause.

Original: “The lessee hereby covenants with the lessor that the lessee shall not at any time during the continuance of the term hereby granted assign, underlet or otherwise part with the possession of the demised premises or any part thereof without the previous consent in writing of the lessor first had and obtained.”

Redraft: “The Tenant must not transfer this lease, sublet the Premises, or give possession of any part of the Premises to anyone else, without the Landlord’s prior written consent.”

Annotation: “demised premises” becomes the defined term “Premises”; “previous … first had and obtained” said the same thing three times; “assign” is explained as “transfer this lease”. Under section 108(j) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 a lessee may otherwise transfer his interest, so the restriction must stay in the deed.

Illustrative exercise 3: a plaint paragraph.

Original: “That the defendant herein, being in dire need of funds, approached the plaintiff herein and requested the plaintiff herein for financial accommodation, whereupon the plaintiff herein, believing the representations of the defendant herein, was pleased to advance a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/-.”

Redraft: “4. On 10 January 2025 the defendant asked the plaintiff for a loan. On the same day the plaintiff lent the defendant Rs. 4,00,000 (Rupees Four Lakh only) by bank transfer from his account at Canara Bank, Dharwad.”

Annotation: the date, amount and mode of payment are the material facts that Order VI Rule 2 asks for; “herein” and the opening “That” add nothing; “was pleased to advance” is replaced by the legal word “lent”, which matters because limitation under Article 21 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from when the loan is made.

5. A short method for every redraft

Read the original and write down, in a line, its legal effect.
List every condition, exception and actor.
Rewrite with the main rule first and the conditions as a list.
Check the redraft against the list in step 2: nothing dropped, nothing added.
Annotate each change and why it does not alter the law.

How this is examined

At least five exercises in the record, from either the drafting or the conveyancing set, must apply plain language techniques, by redrafting or annotating a sample text. Each carries 3 marks, and the examiner looks for an annotation showing that the legal effect is preserved. Good samples: a long statutory proviso, a standard bank guarantee clause, a will clause with “give, devise and bequeath”, a legal notice in old style. At the viva, be ready to explain why a term of art must stay, and to give two examples of legalese with their plain equivalents.