Super Lawyer

Author: Divya Dwivedi

  • Chasing Questions, Not Glory: Crafting a Global Legal Career  – Dr. Argha Kumar Jena, International Disputes Lawyer and Advisor.

    Chasing Questions, Not Glory: Crafting a Global Legal Career  – Dr. Argha Kumar Jena, International Disputes Lawyer and Advisor.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Your academic journey includes a full-scholarship Ph.D. in International Law and Economics from Rome and an LL.M. from Berlin. How has this interdisciplinary training influenced your understanding of economic analysis in the development of international legal norms and dispute resolution mechanisms? 

    Public international law in general requires deep academic insight considering that the efficaciousness of the ‘rule of precedents’ (if any) is volatile in practice. When it comes to International Economic Law (as we like to call it), issues in dispute concern not only economic treaties but its complex interactions with the branches of applicable national laws as well as commercial realities. In such instances, having cultivated the habit of interdisciplinary thought processes can certainly help in strategizing efficiently. ISDS being a form of dispute resolution where effects of economic policies are often subject to adjudication by international tribunals – requires one to understand macroeconomic impacts of such policies and/or measures and also analyze it within the contours of the facts. Dispute resolution mechanisms flowing from treaties are a herd of unicorns within the fields of law. Hence, having a wider field of intellectual vision that one may acquire through interdisciplinary academic pursuits and exposure to multiple legal systems can certainly help. However, I maintain that institutional education is not the only way of going about it. My journey is the consequence of my choices, that I remain happy about. 

    You pursued your Ph.D. in International Law and Economics while working full time, a challenge few take on. What was that experience like, and how did you manage the demands of both academic research and professional responsibilities?

    This again was a consequence of one of the choices that presented itself to me. Applying for Ph.D. Scholarships is a full-time job in itself, and I understood that from the failures of my initial attempts. Identifying a research gap, crafting a proposal and a plan of execution, having it critiqued from experts, choosing a Supervisor, shortlisting universities with appropriate departments, and then making it within the deadlines – all of these mandatory steps to begin a Ph.D. are time-consuming and require dedicated efforts. Luckily, during my stint at a boutique law-firm in Berlin, I had come to be professionally acquainted with a leading expert in the field of international economic law, Prof. Steffen Hindelang. Having already started to work with him part-time, while still at the law firm – allowed me to ease into the process. With time, I was exposed to several complex questions of law and started to learn approaches that experts take while opining on a matter of international economic law. My association with the Professor put me into a network of an intelligentsia, whose sharp and unfiltered critique helped me work on the list of what to do. As I continued to assist him in several of his engagements as an expert in several international forums and arbitrations, my ability to gain context expanded. Before trying to solve a problem, I got to understand a wider gamut of the field within which the solution was to be proposed. This led me to choose a Ph.D. theme that lay in the intersection of what I was working on, and what I could develop it into i.e., “Fate of Protectionism in International Investment Control: A Sustainable Development Perspective”. After 6/7 months of refining my proposal, I found the opportunity in Rome i.e., a rare interdisciplinary Ph.D. programme in economics and law – where I applied with my proposal and ended up getting selected. While the scholarship required me to move to Rome, I continued my role with the Professor that expanded over time as well. As my research and work were largely in the same field, both complemented each other. Being in Rome, allowed me the opportunity to work on a novel project on investment contracts at UNIDROIT. All of it together was indeed a demanding endeavour, but the symbiosis between all the engagements rendered it possible. Of course my mentors, supervisor, and university enabled me to travel and engage adequately to participate in forums of exciting discussions that kept me motivated. It was the ecosystem that made it possible for me.   

    With close to a decade of experience across Germany, Italy, and India, how has your cross-border legal practice informed your strategy in advising global clients, especially in high-stakes commercial arbitrations and international contract negotiations?

    A multi-jurisdictional exposure with the fortune of having hands-on experience throughout – is essentially a professional upbringing narrative. Having been successful at surrounding myself with people smarter than me in several instances has taught me much. As we all know, Civil Law and Common Law – being the two distinct forms of legal systems co-exist with characteristic differences whose intricacies one can experience better while working on cases that necessitate grappling with them. In my limited experience, understanding of differences in procedural and substantive law of contrasting jurisdictions is a non-negotiable for lawyers who want to work on matters ‘international’. So indeed, I now take into account more things in my analysis of facts and law, including cultural and systemic differences of jurisdictions. And most importantly, it helps me delineate the questions that I need help with, when corresponding with my colleagues outside India.  

    In terms of stakes – one must understand that in cross-border disputes, stakes are usually high by default. The process is complex and expensive for the parties concerned, hence is resorted to when stakes are generally high.   

    Your path to becoming a Principal Associate at DMD Advocates has been anything but conventional. What were some key turning points in your journey, and how did they prepare you for your current leadership role? Also, in your role at DMD Advocates, you lead advisory work on cutting-edge issues like crypto-assets and artificial intelligence. How equipped do you think the Indian legal system is in comparison to other jurisdictions to address the legal complexities emerging from digital assets and algorithm-driven systems?

    As key turning points, I would list three of them, (i) having had the opportunity to work and learn under an academic lawyer, that showed me a novel career path that I can tweak for myself, is possible; (ii) moving to Rome, that allowed me to be close to UNIDROIT and get acquainted with some experts who advise on matters concerning Digital Assets; (iii) deciding to move back to India for the opportunity at the Ministry of Finance, which allowed me to apply whatever I learnt to matters of economic treaties on a daily basis. 

    As for my role in DMD Advocates, I am a part of the dispute resolution and litigation team. Here I work on matters concerning both Indian law and International law. Working cultures differ across continents and countries, but it is usually inconsequential to engage in comparisons. However, my style of collaboration with colleagues (including my juniors), as I like to think it, is a blend of German directness in terms of giving and taking feedback, Italian tendency to ease into things unless necessary to do otherwise (I detest fake emergencies) and the signature Indian adaptability in making the best of what is available. 

    In terms of advisory in new technologies, a lawyer’s take is necessitated by the fact that the legal framework applicable doesn’t immediately change, instead it often may need to evolve. Hence, identifying gaps in the legal and regulatory frameworks and advising on account of realities, is a primary need of the hour. However, given the pace in which the digital economy of the world is changing, new challenging questions requiring interdisciplinary approaches are becoming increasingly common for those of us who are active in space. In terms of how prepared the Indian legal system is to adapt to new technologies, I think we have enough smart brains in the country to do the needful. The contextual regulatory landscape is evolving across the world, and India is no exception. It is the age of geoeconomics after all.       

    Having represented clients from the EU, Asia, and the Middle East in arbitration and contract-related matters, what recurring legal risks or contractual pitfalls have you observed in cross-border commercial transactions? Could you share a case study that was most interesting yet challenging for you?

    In terms of pitfalls in international contracts, there are many that I am aware of, but recurring ones include, (i) a uniform and well drafted choice of law/applicable clause across the master contracts and sub-contracts; (ii) lack of explicit referencing of the terms and conditions to a (cross-border) purchase order; and (iii) lack of well drafted hardship and/or force majeure clauses. While any of the three things that I have mentioned may seem elementary to contracts, they have observably caused several complexities that allow dispute resolution to be consequently delayed, albeit for justifiable reasons. 

    It would be difficult to provide a case study in the amount of detail that would be useful for students, but here is something that seems novel but is not. In major construction projects, the contractual framework consists of the master contract, several sub-contracts and also sub-sub-contracts. An arbitral award was passed against an Indian entity (a sub-contractor in such a project) in an international commercial arbitration. However, by the time the award was rendered, the award debtor was declared insolvent by the NCLT. As the lawyers advising the award creditors (who were European), one had the option of following the traditional route of participating in the insolvency proceedings as one of the creditors. However, rather than merely accepting the limited recovery prospects of traditional insolvency proceedings, one may identify alternative enforcement strategies leveraging the complex contractual architecture typical of major construction projects. Subject to the impact of applicable laws, an option could be pursuing parent company guarantees or performance bonds that were likely executed as part of the master contract arrangements. However, we ended up using several indemnity and guarantee clauses in the contractual framework to get the main contractor and the investors in the insolvent company to settle with us on a reasonable quantum.  

    Your experience spans both private and public international law, from assisting European governments in ICSID proceedings to advising the Indian government on WTO and UNCITRAL matters. In your view, what is the future of international investment law amid rising protectionism, digital sovereignty, and shifting geopolitical alliances?

    Investor-State Disputes, and their backgrounds vary greatly in the contexts of the countries involved. So, oversimplification of such complex constructs would be bordering on generalization – that is rather impressible in my profession. However, I can safely say that international investment law is at its adolescence. The procedural reform efforts to ISDS triggered in 2017 at the best of the UNCITRAL Working Group III, have made significant progress in some areas, especially in the context of procedural and crosscutting issues and instruments designed with a focus on mitigation of disputes. One must appreciate that while international investment law principles become seemingly sophisticated, the dispute resolution mechanisms contained in treaties also appear to evolve with time. While ISDS as a method of dispute resolution amongst sovereigns and private entities – is here to stay, the intricacies of its processes and the nature of the disputes themselves are bound to evolve, in light of the new technologies. The typology of policies that may come to be challenged under such a characteristic legal regime would certainly expand. New technologies (including Crypto-currency and Artificial Intelligence) have the potential to creep into the fact patterns of investment and trade disputes.          

    You’ve taught at institutions ranging from Uppsala University to UNIDROIT and South Asian University. Based on your global academic engagements, what do you see as the biggest pedagogical gap in training future international economic lawyers, and what resources or practices would you recommend for staying ahead?

    One of the most visible differences in Indian and European academia, at the graduate and post-graduate level is the student-teacher ratio, which is of course smaller/narrower in Europe. In my estimation, that difference can manifest in terms of student output, if the teaching methods are not curated well. In India, the number of students is higher, so a Professor’s workload will inevitably increase if old teaching methods are retained without integration of new technologies. I would imagine that post-graduation programmes (especially LL.M.s) in India can be modulated to compete with the quality in Europe, UK or USA. Given that most lawyers wouldn’t pursue Doctorates, a post-graduate degree program (like an LL.M.) would be the last stint in institutional education for many future lawyers. We should do our own parts to finish it well! 

    Some European universities use in their post-grad programmes a Problem-Based Learning (PBL) method, where every day’s lectures are accompanied by an application-based exercise and group activities. Indian universities also implement several of such methods, albeit in variance. However, some Eruopean testing methods include an examination for each module (which is always partly or fully open book) and an essay on a topic of their choice guided by Professors. For this to be effective in India, would need significant heavy-lifting by the Professors to design such open-book examinations and their grading methods that accounts for the behavioral patterns of Indian students. The pedagogical gaps, if any, I believe are (i) the lack of curated courses that necessitate post-graduate students to think in terms of real-life problems in examinations that they care about; (ii) lack of automated grading/marking in examination design that aim to test descriptive knowledge or memory retention. 

    As an enthusiast of international economic law, I believe staying atop geopolitical and new technologies news starts as difficult, but after a few months of regular reading becomes easier as one learns to drown the noise. The ORF Newsletter, CSIS Geoeconomics Bi-Weekly Newsletter are good places to start if you cannot read daily. The Economist and Economic Times, manages to keep pace with developments. However, one must cut to the source of the regulation or law concerned to form their own opinion. For investment arbitration news, popularly there is GAR, IAReporter, and Kluwer Arbitration Blog. For AI Research the newsletter from LORE, is quite insightful, I think. While several independent media sources can also be insightful, recommendations may vary according to areas of interest. 

    Get in touch with Dr. Argha Kumar Jena –

  • Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

    Global Perspective, Local Roots: Shaping Law, Leadership, and Impact – Yashasvi Tripathi, Corporate Associate at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, United States.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    As a dual qualified lawyer, we would love to start from the very beginning. How and when did you decide to pursue law, and how did you end up deciding that it was the right time to move on and do your LL.M. as well? We would love to understand your journey, challenges, and how you built your road to excellence.

    I’m from Benares. I did my schooling there, and my father has a business and is also very active in social work. Back then, when I was in school, he used to write letters to authorities on various legal issues, troubles, or policy changes he thought were required for businesses in India. I used to take an active interest in what he was writing, and sometimes he would ask me to draft those letters. I think that’s how writing and my early interface with law and business began at home.

    When I was faced with the question of what I wanted to do, looking back now, I find it quite funny. There were many doctors in my family, so the obvious choice seemed to be medicine. But when I said I wanted to be a doctor, everyone at home said, “Oh no, we already have too many doctors, you should become a civil servant.” So, I initially wanted to become a civil servant, and that’s why I went to National Law University, Delhi. I thought, in Delhi we have everything, all the coaching, and law was considered a great subject for IAS aspirants.

    But when I started studying law, even before entering college, while preparing for CLAT and AILET, I fell in love with it. I used to read The Indian Express and The Hindu daily in Benares. I joined online coaching with Career Launcher because law wasn’t a very well-known option there at that time. This was back in 2012, and now it feels like history. Those days of reading newspapers and following legal developments made me fall in love with law. I realized that after studying law you could do everything a civil servant or even a politician could do in public interest litigation, fighting for the rights of disadvantaged people, becoming a corporate lawyer, anything was possible. The sky was the limit. So, I decided I wanted to stick with law.

    You don’t necessarily have to be a public lawyer, or a corporate lawyer, or any one thing you can carve your own path. That’s when I firmly decided to become a lawyer. Initially, I thought I would practice in the Supreme Court of India. I never imagined I would go to the US. My frame of mind was always to practice in Indian courts.

    By God’s grace, I was selected for National Law University, Delhi, with an All India Rank of six, and I was the first person from Banaras to enter that institution. For a long time, I think I was the only one from my city there. My parents were very supportive, and Delhi gave me tremendous exposure. One thing I learned is that if you work hard, you will succeed.

    I had no legal background, and I didn’t know where I would end up after five years. So, I focused on exploring. I did about 21 or 22 internships in college, which was one of the highest numbers in my batch. I never went back to Banaras during vacations I stayed in Delhi and kept interning. I was not sure whether I wanted to go into the private sector, NGOs, or litigation, so I tried them all.

    Eventually, I realized that I am guided by two principles: hard work and being the best version of myself. When I thought about how to achieve that, I felt pursuing an LL.M. would help me grow further. I also felt my education was incomplete without it. So, after all the internships and hard work in college, I decided to pursue an LL.M. I wrote my SOPs, appeared for exams, and went through the application process, which eventually led me to New York University.

    But more importantly, I want law students, especially those from smaller cities, to know that anything is possible. I consider myself from Banaras, which back then was not a Prime Minister’s constituency or the sought-after city it has become today. I am happy to see its growth now, but at that time it was still considered a small city. I want students from such places to believe that if you work hard and your aim is excellence, you can reach wherever you put your mind to.

    From being in one of the top universities in India to one of the top universities in the world. So how was your journey and the transition? There must be a lot of difference between the academia of NLU Delhi and New York University School of Law. While you were pursuing, what did you do and how did you make sure that your hard work paid off in the US as well? And what was your challenge over there, or maybe whatever you felt was very different and how you approached it differently with all your diligence and hard work. We would love to hear that story as well so that students and learners can understand that for a person who has done 22 internships in NLU Delhi and ended up at NYU, she has made a name for herself. How have you done that?

    It should be near 22, 21, or 25. I’m not sure of the number now. You can check my LinkedIn and I’m not even sure if I put all of them there. But anyway, I would want current students or current law students to take the LL.M. not only as an academic pursuit, not only as an academic course. I want them to take it as a professional pursuit as well. Since it involves a lot of investment, I don’t want students to just go and study. Of course, those who can afford it and who have academic inclinations or want to pursue academia should, by all means, go and do that. But many students fail to understand that the LL.M. is also an opportunity to pursue professional opportunities, and for that they have gone to the US. So utilize the LL.M. for networking opportunities, for exposing yourself to different careers and career professionals.

    I don’t want current NLU students or any law students who are in their fifth year to think they will just study as much as they can in one year when they’re going to the US, London, or Singapore. They should have a balanced course, take the minimum number of credits required, and then start learning outside of college and the classroom as well.

    You have conferences every day. You meet professors, you go to law firms, attend their networking events, and learn what the profession really is. That is very important. This is something students should start thinking about when they are in their fifth year of law school.

    This is one takeaway that I had. And to answer your question, the difference between NYU and NLU Delhi was that at NYU, it’s a totally Socratic method of education. No one is going to check if you are studying or not. You have to guide your own education.

    You have to pick your own subjects, you have to guide your own education, and you are fully responsible for your future, like any adult. So I think an LL.M. or Master’s should be done by an adult who knows what he or she is doing, and what he or she wants to pursue. If you are not sure about that, I would say work a few years in India before going to NYU or doing any LL.M. for that matter. At NYU, I had amazing faculty members who were already great and accomplished professionals. Even in the classroom, we were getting both theoretical and practical knowledge, how you would actually do something in a law firm or in court. That’s what makes the LL.M. different. That’s why it is a Master’s.

    And again, landing a job in the US was very difficult. As Indian citizens, we have to get H-1B sponsorship.

    You have to qualify through a lottery, then you have to get H-1B sponsorship, and you have to qualify the bar exam. Again, if you want, I can elaborate on the subject of how to land a job in the US, but that itself is a different conversation.

     We’d love to understand that also because obviously the people or the students who would like to maybe see how they can plan it. Like you have explained that these are the processes, it’ll be very, very helpful if you can talk a little bit about this aspect as well. How to actually land a job, because that is another struggle. The first struggle is to reach there, and then the second struggle is to find a better job where you can stay and work as well.

    Sure. So when we are in LLM, first of all, we are outside of our shelter. We have to start managing our food, our household, and it’s a foreign country. You are away from your family. It’s new people, plus it’s the pressure of finding a job. It’s a lot of things. So I always tell students to prioritize their wellbeing.

    Give full hundred percent to your education because, at the end of the day, all employers are going to look at your transcript. So you should be very sure not to overburden yourself and not to take extra credits just for your academic satisfaction. Take those kinds of credits which will help you land jobs in the US.

    Like if I’m a corporate lawyer, if someone wants to be a corporate lawyer, they should take mergers and acquisitions, securities, business law, contracts drafting, subjects like this, which make you eligible to sit for the bar exam and which make you a good candidate for the law firms over there. First take only those kinds of subjects. This can be a very controversial thing that I’m saying, don’t do subjects for your academic interest, but to each its own.

    And if you have been there with a lot of financial difficulties and with a lot of struggles, you want to make sure that you get the best opportunity when you are out of that college. I speak with several students from India and all they want is a job in the US after doing LLM because they have put in that kind of resources to get selected for an LLM to go there.

    So I would say, manage your academics well. Don’t overburden yourself and do well in academics. Start networking outside of your law school, inside your law school, network with your law professors. And networking is a long process. Like everyone says, network, network, network. But what is it? First, I would say it’s a sport.

    The more you do, the better you become at it. And it’s going to be a two-way process. Like mentoring, you are going to be a mentee to someone, but again, just don’t be entitled to anyone, don’t just walk up and say, I need a job. You have to learn from their experiences.

    You have to invest time with them so that the people you are speaking with in the US, who you are networking with, should understand that this person is worthy of mentoring. Become mentees to some good professionals in the US. Learn from their experiences. Follow them, genuinely follow them, genuinely learn from them.

    And it’s a two-way street. Everyone knows when you’re speaking with them that you’re looking for a job. So at the end of the day, if they find an opportunity, they will let you know. And you have to keep talking to multiple people, reach out on LinkedIn, email people.

    That’s what I did and that’s how I got a job. And that’s how law students from India who have no connections or who don’t have a background in law, have to make their own connections and that’s how they land a job. But it’s all about hard work and perseverance. It’s not about how smart you are to get a job in the US, it’s about your perseverance and your hard work.

    While in the US, when you started your LLM and began working, you were also a Legal Research Analyst with Jethmalani & Nallaseth PLLC. After that, you were associated with Nishith Desai Associates as well, in the US itself. So how did you plan it? Why did you decide to join these institutions? And how did your internships or the kind of work profile you had in India help you understand the working environments of India and the US, because there is also a huge difference? Also, how did you adjust, and what kind of strategies did you follow to make sure you adapted well, and obviously worked as hard as you always do?

    I started my professional journey, I would say, in the US. I did all kinds of internships in India, but I never worked professionally there. I went directly for my master’s. But I worked with two institutions, as you named: Jethmalani & Nallaseth and Nishith Desai Associates, whose headquarters or main offices are in India. So I have worked with Indian institutions, I would say. And then I went to Dechert, which is a big law firm. After that, I went to Davis Wright Tremaine, which is also a big law firm.

    As you said, it’s different. But I always wanted to be a New York lawyer, a US attorney, and I was in New York, so I wanted to be a NY attorney when I was doing my LLM. As I told you initially, I have always been driven by hard work and by striving to be the best, at least persevering for the best where I am.

    When I was in LLM, I understood that being in the US and getting employed there is very difficult. You have to be hardworking, strong academically, good at networking only then can you land a job in the US. So that became a challenge for me, and whenever I’m faced with any challenge, I am motivated to tackle it.

    I had to come back to India after LLM, but I thought, “Oh no, this is very challenging. Only the best of the best, apparently, can do it.” But after these many years of experience, I can say it’s not about the best of the best, it’s about hard work and perseverance.

    Then I told my father, “Dad, why not pursue a few years of employment in the US? I want to get a job and then I’ll come back.” I felt my education in the US was not complete without a few years of professional experience. He said, “Okay, go.”

    Back then, I started looking for opportunities. As I said, I had no professional experience from India, so I went directly from NLU Delhi to NYU. So landing a job for me was very difficult. That’s why when I speak to current LLM students who have a few years of experience, I tell them, You are already at an advantageous position compared to what I was.

    I started with the first opportunity I got, which was an immigration law firm. It was not a corporate law firm. My employer was Mr. Anil Jethmalani at Jethmalani & Nallaseth. He still continues to be my mentor. He was very kind to give me my first job. He saw that I was genuine. I had interned, but had no professional experience. He sponsored my visa, and I started working there very diligently as an immigration attorney.

    We don’t have immigration practice in India, of course it is outsourced, but it’s not established there. I started working there, but I was always interested in corporate law. So I used to network, network, network. Before going to the office to do my job, which, you know, was paying my bills, I would go to different law firms, attend conferences, meet people, write to folks on LinkedIn, and request coffee chats or informational interviews. That’s how I moved to Nishith Desai Associates.

    Again, Mr. Vaibhav Parikh of Nishith Desai Associates, the head of the US offices, has been amazing and a great mentor. This was my first corporate law job. I didn’t have a corporate law background from India. I was interested in pursuing something else, but when I was exposed to different things, having done all my internships, met people, followed the news I gradually decided what I wanted to do next. I had no fixed plan initially.

    Then I decided I wanted to be a corporate lawyer, and I decided on this in New York. Some people plan it beforehand: they want to be a corporate lawyer, then do an LLM, then get the job. I decided this after finishing my LLM. Mr. Vaibhav Parikh saw potential in me, thankfully, and offered me my first corporate law job in New York. At Nishith Desai Associates, I also worked very diligently, and I hope they felt the same. I worked there for almost one and a half to two years.

    At Nishith Desai Associates, the work involved practicing Indian law. We were co-counsels with foreign law firms, doing work for US clients who wanted to have Indian operations. So essentially, we were practicing Indian law for US clients or US law firms. Having done my LLM in New York and cleared the bar exam, I wanted to be part of even bigger global law firms, working on more complex deals. That’s how I shifted to big law, to Dechert. This required a lot of networking and meeting people, and then I came to Davis Wright Tremaine, where I am currently.

    Here, I’m practicing US law as a US attorney, focusing on M&A. The clients I work for and the cases I handle are very complicated and high-profile, and I thoroughly enjoy working on them. It has been a very enriching and challenging journey so far.

    Moving from an Indian law firm to a US corporate law firm, which is one of the biggest over there, what was your way to transition? How did you make that transition so easily or with a challenge, with your hard work? Also, the kind of understanding of international jurisdictions is absolutely different when you are practicing in litigation or practicing corporate law in-office, in-house. What is your understanding about that? Also, what prompted you to decide on corporate law, and how have you managed so far?

    So I thought of corporate law and I decided on corporate law because it’s very dynamic and fast-moving, and I’m a person, sorry to say with less patience. So I want fast-moving things or fast results. Litigation takes many years, and the same applies to arbitration.

    I was interested in international arbitration as well, and I pursued a lot of courses in that. I have publications in those areas, but I saw that corporate law is dynamic and fast-moving. I would be counsel to businesses, which was my motivation to be a lawyer in the first place, having seen my father.

    I would be their go-to person. I would meet clients from the business community. It’s very fast-paced, dynamic, and logical. You have things in your control. You don’t have to stand in court for hours. You are not in front of any tribunals. If things are in your control and your co-counsel or your peer controls, I am working for my client, and the other law firms are working for their clients. I’m a very collaborative person as well. So we collaborate and give results like we collaborate to merge two companies, acquire, merge, sell, or spin off.

    I wanted to do business law. That’s how I decided to be a corporate lawyer. I’m happy about my choice of law. You can see the results of your hard work in real time, which is very satisfying.

    And how did I prepare for my roles in US firms? I would say there are a lot of similarities. Of course, the working culture is different. In Indian firms, it’s very hierarchical and fast-paced. In US firms, it’s also fast-paced, but there’s less hierarchy. Senior lawyers are actually invested in your development. That’s what I experienced in my law firms, Dechert and Davis Wright Tremaine. My seniors are heavily invested in my mentorship and learning, and that’s what I also pass on to my juniors. I get to learn a lot and also pass on that knowledge.

    It’s high-paced, with complicated cases. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we try to simplify solutions or innovate solutions for complicated problems. For example, something you could do with a 50-page SPA (Share Purchase Agreement) might be condensed to 20 pages. We try to be very efficient for our clients because they’re paying us by the hour. We try to be as efficient as possible and innovate where we can.

    So these are the differences between the two law firms, but again, to each their own. People can do whatever they want in different places, and I got to learn a lot from all of these experiences, for sure.

    What kind of qualities do you look for in candidates? Because that is also a very major part of preparation for any student. And not only qualities the way they act, the kind of etiquette that you see in them, how do you judge them? After all, an interview is just one day, but the person will be with you for a longer period of time.

    So what kind of checklist, or anything, can you share about what you observe while recruiting someone for such a big law firm?

    First of all, this is, again, a very controversial thing to say. I should feel comfortable in that person’s company. Our work hours can at times get very challenging. We have signings and closings; we are rushing, and sometimes it’s fine, but at other times it’s super stressful. So you want to work with a person who is collaborative, who is nice, who can handle tasks independently if I assign them. Of course, it varies depending on the candidate’s year, but being nice and hardworking is key.

    They should be able to take initiative. I should see from that candidate whether they are proactive and helpful, because we all work in teams, and you want people who support each other during stressful hours. Hardworking, collaborative, and nice.

    When you are interviewing with law firms like these, you are already smart. You can only get to these interviews if you are smart. So all the candidates are intelligent. The challenge is to find someone who fits our culture wherever you are. The culture I look for is collaborative, hardworking, independent, and responsible for someone who says “yes” when given responsibilities. These are the things I would look for.

    But again, this is something for law entrants to think about later. First, I would encourage them to have a spectacular CV, to be smart, and to be eligible to reach these places.

    Intern in a lot of places. If you are sure you want to do corporate law, do internships with top-notch law firms in India. Go there, do research associateships with professors during your LLM, and then go for these interviews.

    So at the very end, we would love to understand that with such a demanding professional life, the kind of commitments that you have for something you have worked so hard for, and now that you have reached that particular space, how are you planning to manage a healthy work-life balance along with being a new mom? How are you going to delegate your responsibilities, and how do you see that so far, both with your earlier life and now with being a new mom yourself? So what are your plans for times to come, and how have you managed it so far?

    So far, I think I have managed it well. Not perfectly, but at least I have reached where I am and have managed it fine. I would say strategy is key. You have to be a pre-planner and be strategic about what you’re planning.

    So far, every morning, I make my to-do list and try to prioritize things at the very beginning: what is urgent, what has to be done, what can be delegated to someone else, and what is something that has to be done by me. This is something I have to complete and submit to my seniors.

    Every morning, I do my to-do list and plan accordingly, and I make sure that I have some time for myself for walking, for the gym, or whatever. I do that in the evenings and then have dinner. But at times, you don’t get enough time, given how corporate jobs are. I think strategy, pre-planning, and thinking about the urgency of a matter of what is delegatable, non-delegatable, and what to do in the mornings is very important.

    But honestly, I’m a new mom now. I myself don’t know how I’m going to manage my motherhood, which I absolutely cherish, and I’m thankful to God for this blessing. I am just ending my maternity leave and have to rejoin my law firm job, which I really enjoy and love doing.

    So let’s see how I manage those. I’m sure in my law firm, I have a lot of mothers who are balancing work and family. At Davis Wright Tremaine, we have a very good support system and a strong group of working mothers who have been very kind with their advice. I’m sure I will learn from them. But this is something I should share with you in a few years down the line how I manage my work-life balance after being a new mom.

    Get in touch with Yashasvi Tripathi –

  • Across Borders and Benchmarks: A Journey in Disputes, Insolvency and Restructuring. – Urvashi Salecha, Dual Qualified Lawyer and Legal Manager at Harneys, Hong Kong.

    Across Borders and Benchmarks: A Journey in Disputes, Insolvency and Restructuring. – Urvashi Salecha, Dual Qualified Lawyer and Legal Manager at Harneys, Hong Kong.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Your career trajectory is truly inspiring. Having started your journey in India, what initially motivated you to explore opportunities abroad? Was an international legal career always your goal, or did it evolve with time and experience?

    While an international career was always intriguing, I did not really plan for this move. I relocated to Hong Kong for personal reasons and in hindsight, this was the best God gifted turn in my career destiny. 

    After working at Khaitan & Co for over two years, I was constantly fidgeting with the idea of pursuing an LLM from the UK/US to enhance my skills. In fact, my initial career plan was always aimed at being part of the Indian Judiciary after procuring an LLM. However, I ended up with a real life LLM (something like the real life MBA) upon my move to Hong Kong. 

    Sorry but nothing riveting about my international legal career albeit a very fulfilling one indeed (whatever be the catalyst). 

    In the early stages of your career, you worked with several top-tier law firms. What were some of the key takeaways from those experiences that helped shape your foundation in dispute resolution?

    Yes, I was fortunate to intern and work with many reputed law firms, legal professionals and even clerks with a High Court Judge before joining Khaitan & Co in Mumbai. Given our Indian legal education system is largely based on rote learning and lacks the practical and critical thinking aspects of the law, it is crucial to explore your interests by way of practical traineeships during your law school breaks. I would say these internships not only built a foundation in dispute resolution (for me personally), they were essential in preparing me for the private practice role I undertook with Khaitan & Co. It is your first tryst as a professional and guides you to (i) figure out where your interests lie (i.e. private practice, corporate in-house, academia and several other fields within the practice of law), (ii) develop interpersonal and communication skills, and (iii) really get a hands on experience on the culture and workings of that specific role (e.g. a law firm or a company). 

    After spending two years at a leading Indian law firm, you transitioned to international practice. What prompted this shift, and how did you navigate the cultural and professional differences between the Indian and Hong Kong legal environments?

    As mentioned earlier, my relocation to Hong Kong was part of God’s plan. When I moved to Hong Kong, my only professional acquaintance in this new jurisdiction was my husband, who is a banker. Basically, I had to start from scratch, reintroducing myself as an Indian disputes lawyer looking for private practice roles. To make things more exciting, shortly after my arrival, the COVID-19 pandemic struck, bringing layoffs and market uncertainties.

    Despite these challenges, I reached out to numerous professionals, sent cold messages, and built new connections daily. This journey required humility and grit, as the Hong Kong legal industry is highly competitive. Being a newcomer without Hong Kong qualifications or international law experience, I was rarely a recruiter’s first choice.

    Transitioning from a top-tier law firm in India, with an established pedigree, to being completely unrecognized in Hong Kong was a profound experience. However, these initial years in Hong Kong marked my steepest professional growth. I learnt the art of networking and the benefits of a strong follow-up. I knew that positions won’t be created for a junior lawyer such as myself and I needed to keep hunting for the appropriate opening so that when there is one, I get a chance to interview for that role. 

    I also did not want to wait for the perfect opportunity and I took up an in house role with a leading manufacturing company (Rochdale Spears Group) immediately upon my move to Hong Kong (before transitioning to private practice at Harneys (my current role)).  Whilst at Rochdale, I also simultaneously prepared for the Hong Kong qualification exams given my interests always lied in pursuing litigation. 

    You’re currently focused on cross-border insolvency litigation and restructuring. Having practiced dispute resolution in India as well, how would you compare the Hong Kong legal system with the Indian system? Are there specific procedures or practices from Hong Kong that you believe could be effectively adapted into the Indian context?

    While both Hong Kong and India are common law jurisdictions, the practice, procedures and especially case management are fairly distinct. To clarify, whilst I am Hong Kong qualified, I’m currently working at an offshore law firm where we advise clients on BVI, Cayman Islands and Bermuda laws (all systems largely based on UK and common law). 

    In my experience, litigation in Hong Kong, UK or any of the offshore jurisdictions mentioned above, is more mature and structured. 

    Firstly, there is an emphasis on early settlement (i.e. out of court resolutions). There are even certain pre action protocols to be followed and pre trial settlement is highly encouraged. 

    Second, if a matter does go to trial, it won’t last for several decades unlike in India. In fact, the courts will block a week or two for a specific matter to complete the trial (including evidence and final arguments). Adjournments are rare as compared to India (and mostly at the behest of both parties i.e. by consent if they are exploring settlement negotiations for instance)

    Having said that, India courts (i.e. higher courts SC/HCs as well as tribunals and lower courts) have a very high workload with judges handling large volumes of cases daily compared with the courts of the other jurisdictions I mentioned earlier. So it’s obviously remarkable how the Indian judges are managing these volumes. However, an intrinsic balance needs to be found, with perhaps higher no. of judicial officers and moving towards a less adversarial approach towards disputes and incentivising pre trial settlement. 

    Lastly, even alternative dispute mechanisms such as arbitrations are concluded more efficiently, with challenges to the final award considerably lesser as compared to India (where majority of the arbitral awards are challenged in Courts). 

    Being qualified to practice in both India and Hong Kong, how has this dual qualification enhanced your cross-border legal practice?  Could you also share your experience preparing for and clearing the Overseas Lawyers Qualification Examination (OLQE)? What strategies or resources were most helpful to you during the process?

    As challenging as it was, I thoroughly enjoyed preparing for the OLQE. To put things in perspective, the pass rate for these exams is as low as 20% so you know the odds are not exactly in your favour. 

    The exams are highly technical with all questions being completely application based. So you are essentially answering real life legal queries (in a time bound manner). As Indian law school graduates, we are so used to rote learning and exams lacking critical analysis, I was not only preparing for the HK law exams, I was re-learning the study techniques too. 

    It was a test of disciplined, structured learning  and being consistent and completely focused in your preparation leading up to the exams. You also need to keep ample time for revision given the vast breadth of topics that are covered within a single head of an exam. With some luck, and blessing coupled with hard work and finding the right tutors, I was able to clear all heads in my first attempt. 

    To answer your first question i.e. engaging in different jurisdictions and legal systems, it really allows you to widen your scope of learning, you are not just learning two sets of laws, you are also exploring and servicing different cultures. For me, at Harneys, we deal with several Chinese clients on one hand and common law judicial systems on the other. So that’s balancing a lot of interests at the same time. I think being curious, understanding client’s needs and ensuring efficient service has kept me afloat while working in both jurisdictions

    You’ve taken on leadership roles in both diversity initiatives and business development, with BD and networking now being a key part of your responsibilities. Since these skills aren’t typically taught, especially in traditional legal training, how did you cultivate them, and what guidance would you give to legal professionals looking to build confidence in this area?

    Yes, I lead the Tone from the Top committee at Women in Law Hong Kong and have been part of WILHK as well as other DEI committees/member groups. I’m also quite actively involved in the BD initiatives at Harneys. Whilst both are distinct and serve differing objectives, it all stems from the art of networking. 

    As you rightly point out, this is neither taught or even considered as part of your skillset in law school or as junior lawyers. I believe this is a quintessential ability to develop in any profession (not just law).  

    So how to develop these skills. To me, it happened very organically. I was in a new jurisdiction, completely out of my comfort zone. All regular methods of finding a job had failed (i.e. through recruiters or applications to law firm websites or HR personnel). So, I had to be creative with finding opportunities. I started reaching out to people on LinkedIn (even if I did not know them), asking for 30 mins of their time/ or a coffee chat. At every meeting, I tried to expand the network by asking for introductions to more connections or membership in communities. This really helped build foundations on communication skills and confidence to hold conversations. 

    The transition to being involved in BD meetings and initiatives at Harneys was easier based on the foundations I built early on. I think it all comes down to being aware of the opportunities available if you can take that first step. It’s important to have a strong legal foundation and technical skills such as writing, analysis and research. However, at the same time, it is equally important to  ensure that you’re perceived as a good lawyer, who is capable of being the face of a firm or representing the firm in front of potential clients. As you get elevated (e.g. at partner level), these are the skills that matter more. So it’s always better to build on these from the beginning rather than waiting to be in a leadership position. 

    As a Hong Kong-qualified lawyer currently advising on various offshore litigation matters (including such as the implementation of schemes/restructuring) in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, and BVI, how do you navigate the distinct legal nuances of these jurisdictions? Furthermore, how would you compare the commercial and dispute resolution frameworks Hong Kong and India, and what key differences do you observe in their approaches to cross-border transactions?

    A very good question indeed and while I marinate in these challenges daily, not something I discuss often haha. The key is compartmentalising. Given the niche I’m in, its very easy to get muddled up with the laws of different jurisdictions. Given I assist with several cross border matters and a single work day may involve drafting pleadings for a Cayman scheme of arrangement court sanction, assisting in a BVI law advice on insolvency laws and end with a client call exploring litigation in Bermuda. 

    I ensure that I have separate notes and sections (physically in my room as well as digitally on my desk) for each of the jurisdictions and then each of the matters. You have to be extremely organised with filings, matter segmentation etc. And of course, with some time and experience, you just get more confident in dealing with complex issues by breaking them down into simpler soluble pieces and then attending to each of them separately. And as lawyers, the most important thing is to have a mindset of continuous learning. 

    For students aspiring to build a career in international dispute resolution, what guidance would you offer? Are there any practical tips, skills, or experiences you believe are especially valuable as they prepare to enter this field?

    International dispute resolution is a pretty wide term. I’ll answer it this way, to build a career in law (whether in India or globally) requires consistent learning, hard work, resilience, critical thinking and most importantly patience. Unlike other career paths like AI, bankers (which are fast paced and also highly technical), law requires a lot of patience and experience. 

    As for practical tips, I’d say apart from the basics (i.e. building a strong foundational knowledge in your chosen niche, working on the succinct legal drafting/writing skills (again something not given enough attention to during law school) …

    Find a sponsor within your firm and a mentor outside. It is very important to build trust based networks and have someone back you within the organisation who genuinely is invested in your growth and development and a guide outside the firm, you can confide in and get the required support and learning. 

    Is there a motto or guiding principle you’ve followed throughout your legal career? In addition, how do you see the future of alternative dispute resolution evolving, especially with technological and global shifts in the legal profession? How do you personally stay updated on the latest developments in dispute resolution?

    Failure is not fatal, success is not final, it is the courage that counts~!

    This profession especially requires a lot of patience and resilience. In my opinion, there is no scope for instant gratification in law. You need to be thorough and keep learning and updating your knowledge base. 

    As for the impact of technology, we are definitely going to see some transformations. A lot of the tasks will be automated (are already being automated) which is potentially a good change because this may free up a lot of time spent by lawyers on admin/mechanical tasks and compliment the legal industry. As far as I’m concerned, I did attempt to get AI assistance at times, for presentations etc. I personally feel the problem of hallucinations needs to be solved, especially for legal tech AI – we cannot be citing wrong judgments made up by AI. Hopefully this will change soon. 

    Lastly, I would part by saying the cliché, you have to be curious and keep upskilling yourself (whether it is knowledge or technology). The world is moving and transforming very fast and one needs to keep pace. Having said that, this doesn’t mean you lose out on life, loved ones or your hobbies/interests. Almost every organisation (in law or elsewhere) values these additional extra curricular skills. For me it’s the water, and related outdoor activities like sailing, kayaking, windsurfing. A weekend in the sea and I feel refreshed to take on the work week!

    Get in touch with Urvashi Salecha –

  • Navigating Complexity From Corporate Law to White Collar Investigations with Trust and Insight – Varij Sharma, Founder and Partner at Gravitas Legal.

    Navigating Complexity From Corporate Law to White Collar Investigations with Trust and Insight – Varij Sharma, Founder and Partner at Gravitas Legal.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    You have worked with a Fortune 50 company and have over 17 years of experience across sectors like corporate and commercial law, white-collar crime, and investment fund-related issues. What has been your motivation behind pursuing these sought-after niche fields, and how do you make them simpler for people who are often uncomfortable discussing them? How did you build your name in this niche of the niche, and what continues to drive you?

    Initially, when I started off as a lawyer, my concentration in fact was that whatever I do, I must do it in the best manner possible. As a young lawyer, that was my motivation. And while growing up, every day, it was almost as if going to a warfront, if I can put it that way, facing new challenges.

    And as a corporate lawyer facing new queries, dealing with different and new expectations every day. But one thing that remained constant was that I used to set my own milestones and my only motivation was that I wanted to be the best at what I could be and first test myself.

    I used to set those expectations for myself. As far as trying to be a general corporate lawyer or a decent enough general corporate lawyer, since the very beginning, I never thought of compartmentalizing myself or restricting myself to a particular field. I think that was also because of my upbringing at Dua Associates and I must take the name of my first mentor, Mr. Salil Gulati, who himself was a general corporate lawyer and I used to report to him. The way he nurtured and mentored me, and made me understand the concepts of law in terms of how they are supposed to be applied, was invaluable, because typically what we do in colleges is much different from what you actually end up applying, or rather how you end up applying.

    Of course, academic education or being good at academics is very important, but at the same time, one should know how to apply it. So since day one, I feel that I had a great mentor and he was the one who inculcated this fact, or rather this idea in my mind, that we don’t need to be specifically focused on a particular practice area.

    As a general corporate lawyer, we are capable enough of advising on all aspects of a company, of a business generally. Progressing from that, when I started Gravitas, beyond simply following the general corporate trajectory, we started two new spaces for ourselves, litigation and corporate strategy. Over a period of time, what had also happened and what I also started realizing was that when you advise companies, when you advise businesses, as a lawyer, you hold a position of great trust and confidence. And when anyone actually approaches you, they don’t approach you with a specific task, at least an Indian client doesn’t. They don’t approach you for a specific task.

    It always tends to evolve into something more. So my concentration always was that I should hold that position of trust and confidence so that people would be able to talk to me about all of their issues, not just a specific project or a particular transaction, but whatever other troubles or problems they are facing.

    So over a period of time I also tried to develop a conversationalist in myself. And today, when I speak to my interns or juniors, I try to make them understand the value of conversations and how, by having those conversations, you can develop trust, and how other people may also see what sort of knowledge you carry and the different aspects you can actually advise people on. Slowly, taking from there, when I deal with our foreign clients or institutions, it so happens that ultimately all of these clients also tend to look for something more than just legal advice from their lawyers. They would want that if there is a project, then there should be something more that a lawyer actually brings to the table, be it project knowledge, financial knowledge, and so on and so forth.

    So I kept on, and I still am, looking at avenues to learn more and develop my knowledge—more holistic knowledge, touching upon not just legal aspects of a deal or a business, but also all other aspects which would otherwise impact a particular scenario.

    Be it a transaction, a project, or generally just a legal query. That perspective also actually helps you in providing the right answer to a problem from the perspective of your client. Because sometimes what happens is we lawyers tend to go into too much detail of legal aspects and ultimately we just sort of go around in circles and probably don’t answer a query that requires a practical solution. So yes, that also enabled me to understand, answer, and respond to queries in a much more effective manner, I would say.

    In India, lawyers often focus only on legal aspects, but clients frequently trust us with personal or even psychological concerns. How have you managed this balance while maintaining professionalism and ethics, especially with international clients who often rely heavily on their lawyers? Additionally, how do you guide your juniors in handling such situations, and what strategies have you found effective?

    Sure. Thank you. So, see, like I said, it was also a drive. I mean, when I started realizing the true meaning of becoming a lawyer, that it is not just hidden in a particular opinion that we give or in a document.

    Regardless of whether you are talking to institutions, there is always a human behind that institution also. I always try and spend time on that human aspect. I give people time. I try to understand where the people are coming from. Sometimes, I would say not just sometimes, most of the time, things are not how they appear to be. I always had the zeal to constantly look behind the curtains. Let me just put it that way. I always wanted to understand where this aspect was coming from, rather than just treating a query or a requirement that our clients would send to us, treating it just on the face of whatever was being sought.

    I would always spend time on that query, and I would just think, you know, okay, fine, if someone is asking me a particular question, where is this coming from? Why is this question being asked? I would spend time on that aspect, and when I would try and answer that query—and of course, this happened much later in my life because initially, the concentration, or rather the focus, always used to be just to be a lawyer.

    You know, one would just be overwhelmed with the fact that this is a job and ultimately I have to do well at it and all of that. But over a period of time and later in my career, and especially this transition actually happened when we started Gravitas Legal.

    We wanted the firm to have a structure. We had thought about what we want, how we want our clients and other people to see us, people who approach us for any sort of assistance. How do we want them to see us? So, it was the drive, I would say it was the drive. And I constantly kept on looking for those behind-the-curtains or behind-the-scenes reasons of why and what was emanating. At the same time, I realized that position of trust and confidence that I was just talking about—everybody seeks that. I don’t think it matters whether it is an Indian client or a foreign client, an individual client, or a small, medium, or large business. They would always want their counsel, their lawyer, to gain that position of trust and confidence.

    And that position of trust and confidence, no matter how sound we are as a firm ethically, or what sort of name we have, generally how people know us, that position of trust and confidence is always reserved for the individual you are interacting with. For our clients, that position of trust and confidence will always be with the individuals they are actually interacting with. So when I interact with my juniors, my ex-juniors also, whenever I have interacted with them on these aspects, on these lighter or rather subtler aspects of relationships, I have always tried to tell them that when your client is actually approaching you, there is always something more. Try and strike friendships.

    Try and strike deeper relationships with them so that they can open up to you—deeper professional relationships, of course—where they are able to speak and open up to you to give you a more holistic picture of where the problem actually lies. It has happened so many times that people who have been representatives of my corporate clients have also ended up approaching me for their personal issues, and I have been more than happy to assist them, of course subject to there being no conflict. But at the same time, I think my ultimate win has always been that people are able to give me that position where they think they can actually rely on me and come and discuss those aspects with me.

    The last thing I would like to add is that I have been a very open communicator with my clients. If I have not felt—and look, a general corporate practice is actually quite different from other corporate practices because we are exposed to many more dimensions of a corporate than other, I would say, focused practices—so with general corporate practice, what tends to happen is that when you get that sort of exposure, you also inevitably get into those wider aspects.

    You get that exposure and you try to make the best out of it. And also when you are getting that exposure, I feel we should not hold ourselves back. We should be able to communicate very clearly what we as trusted counsels believe that a client is exposed to. Sometimes I have seen that people shy away from it—that if someone has asked me a question on the Companies Act, I will just answer that query. But I have never been that. Frankly, I can say one thing that I am very happy about myself as a professional, as a lawyer, is that I have never stopped myself from advising my client and being that voice in their ears saying this is right and this is wrong. And when something is wrong, I would never shy away from saying this is wrong.

    So, yes, that is again something that I have worked on and tried to focus more on.

    When handling internal investigations or whistleblower matters, how do you strike a balance between transparency, compliance, and protecting the reputation of the organization, while also managing sensitive internal information? Additionally, how do you maintain your own mental well-being during this process?

    I will give you some sort of an insight on how investigations, rather whistleblower investigations and white collar crime actually proceed and what tends to go into the process. I mean, everybody knows exactly what it means, but what tends to happen in the process, right?

    See, what happens is that when complaints such as this come through, we are supposed to act independently of the complainant as well as the organization and also probably the group of people who may be the potential accused.

    What tends to happen is that when you enter that arena, no matter who may have appointed you, everybody is just looking at you with a lot of anxiety, let me put it that way: what exactly are they going to find and what are they going to do with that knowledge?

    So you have to develop a very, very focused approach with very clear objectives in mind: what are you exactly here for? It’s very easy in such a situation, and let me tell you, when people actually start in such sensitive situations, when people start talking to you, there will be people ranging from the lower managerial positions right up to the top of the organization whom you have to interview and speak to. You may be required to go through thousands of documents to decipher and understand what exactly has happened, and whether ultimately what is being complained of has actually occurred or not.

    So in such situations, when you sit down and start talking to these people, and again they could be 25, 50, or 100 people that you’re talking to over a very short span of time, once again people open up, and your best case scenario, I mean, if you want to decipher something, it is all about whether these people are going to actually trust you and open up to you.

    Because that’s what you’re relying on. These are people who are actually working for an organization and they know that organization much better than you. It’s very easy to conduct an investigation which is absolutely objective, based on documents and policies, et cetera.

    But at the same time, whenever there is a human angle, you need to understand what is happening behind the scenes. So whenever we are in such a situation where we have to conduct an internal investigation, apart from going through the policies and documents, et cetera, we also need to go into the depths of what people perceive is wrong when a complainant is making a complaint. You have to understand from their perspective what exactly they are saying has happened in a wrong fashion, or the policies that have not been adhered to.

    There’s non-compliance, right?

    And they will not be able to write down that as per this particular policy this is wrong and therefore I’m complaining. It’s never that simple; it’s always gray. The practice of law itself, at least in India, most of the time deals with the gray.

    So as far as this process is concerned, one has to have a deeper understanding and should be able to create a very, very thorough process for themselves which can be followed in order to conduct an impartial investigation as an independent investigator, because most of the time these reports are actually submitted to either the board or the shareholders, and they should be able to communicate very, very clearly what the risk aspects are and what exactly has happened, what steps to take next as per the policy, and what steps are required to be taken as well. So, I would say a very clear and thorough process has to be devised. Most organizations have a very clear internal investigations or whistleblower policy, but of course they don’t prescribe a process, because processes are developed and created by the independent investigator, which comes through.

    And of course, you should be able to communicate very thoroughly and very clearly who the individuals are that you want to interview and what documents you need to look at. There is always resistance. I would say there is always resistance, but at the same time you should be able to get past that and thereafter conduct a meaningful and result oriented investigation.

    When investigating or working with a company, it’s difficult to build immediate trust, and the same applies to team members. You started Gravitas Legal about a decade ago, how did you find the right team members who share mutual trust and understanding with you? With the global presence you are now building, how has that been possible, and what strategies did you follow to develop and sustain that trust within your team?

    See, legal practice has changed a lot in the past decade or so. When we established Gravitas Legal back in 2015, I think that was around the same time there was this spurt of new generation law firms. I think that was the time around 2014, 2015 when there were a lot of breakaway firms that started coming through.

    The idea at that point in time, our main motivation rather, to start Gravitas Legal, was that we wanted to create something new and something better than what we had seen and what we had experienced. There were things that we wanted to do differently and probably advise differently, probably conduct the business differently, probably administratively we wanted to set up something new and different, probably partnership structure-wise, we wanted to create something new and different. So primary motivations were these. I am extremely thankful for all the people who have, in the past 10 years, worked with us, because each one of them has not only been instrumental in our growth but also has always ended up teaching us something new.

    I think the number of people or the newer people that we have worked with, they have kept us grounded in our upbringing also as a firm. Because like I said, in the past 10 years, the practice of law, the practice of law firms, has changed drastically.

    The market has changed drastically. There are opportunities like there have never been before. If you are a hardworking, focused person, there are opportunities galore for youngsters. At the same time, there is freedom. And I would also say that the perspective of clients has also changed.

    Clients have become very result-oriented, and they also allow the freedom that is required by lawyers and law firms to operate. The advent of so many newer firms actually shows that there is enough institutional work.

    There is enough corporate work in the market, and that actually shows the maturity that the Indian clientele is also achieving slowly. Of course, there are foreign clients also, but the Indian client has also matured in that they don’t want to go to the same old lawyers or the same old law firms. So the entire ecosystem has matured quite a bit. As far as my younger colleagues are concerned, younger colleagues or colleagues, my contemporaries are concerned, like I was saying, we are extremely thankful to them that they have spent the time they have spent with us and helped us grow immensely. There are a lot of our ex-colleagues who have now probably moved on and taken new roles in either different law firms or in-house. And actually, when I look back and remember where we all had started from and when I see that time has run so fast and people have grown so much and the growth has been mutual, frankly, that actually shows that perhaps we were doing something right and probably, somehow, slightly, we also contributed to their growth. I would say in that case, more than that position of trust and confidence, I think it was mutual confidence. Like I said, in the past 10 years, there are opportunities galore in the market, and still people trusted us, worked with us, and have been participating in our journey. I’m very thankful for that.

    Growing together not only feels good but also helps a law firm grow exponentially. Over the past 10 years, you and your firm have mutually grown, and along the way, you’ve worked on cross-border transactions, joint ventures, corporate law, and M&A, areas very different from what a general counsel usually handles. In today’s environment, where businesses are moving toward sustainable models, how do you see Gravitas Legal progressing in the next 5–10 years, and what plans have you made? While working in such niche fields, how do you identify which strategies work, which don’t, and how do you explain complex issues in simple language for clients who, though corporate, are still human? How do you train your team to do the same, keep everyone grounded despite pressures like money or mental strain, and ensure work is done beautifully, as you have been doing?

    Sure. Just concentrating on the first part of your question, considering the various areas of my practice or the firm’s practice, the firm actually practices general corporate, M&A, private equity, venture capital. We have a great and flourishing insolvency and restructuring practice, project finance, and we also do corporate litigation, indirect tax, criminal law. And they have developed, and let me just tell you this, we had started off with in the first instance.

    We started off as a boutique project finance law firm at that point in time. And then thereafter, we picked up. I was only 6 or 7 years into the profession when we had started, and I was responsible for building the general corporate and ancillary practices, as I call them. So, general corporate and M&A and PE VC funds, insolvency, restructuring, corporate and litigation strategy, everything came later. We were first a boutique project finance law firm.

    When starting off as a project finance law firm and when we saw that this is the only practice area that we are starting off with, our first concentration was on doing what we do best, which was project finance. Soon, when people also realized that now we are independent of any other tag and this is the ship that we are running, people would approach us, clients would approach us with different requirements.

    As from a young lawyer’s perspective, yes, you have to learn, you have to study while practicing also, you have to study. I have, despite having started Gravitas, while today it seems that time has flown like anything, it has been a journey which has required a lot of hard work. When you look at building new practice areas constantly, there are also things that you are dealing with for the first time. And practice areas which you have probably earlier not touched upon. There has to be an approach that you have to develop.

    It’s like how it goes for any lawyer who is just passing out from a law school and entering this business when they are a complete clean slate. When you start a practice area as a partner also, or rather as a leader at a law firm, the idea is that you should develop first a deeper understanding at your end of what you are dealing with or what you are approaching.

    What is that practice area that you want to master? Or rather, you should be able to go out there and say that we can do a major value add to whoever we are supporting in a new practice area. And then building credibility. Yes, organizations and institutions just don’t line up outside your door to give you work.

    You have to show them that you can actually perform, and there are a lot of smaller things that you would start with, things that make them gain confidence in you, and they should also be able to give you those opportunities.

    So from a young lawyer’s perspective, I would say that yes, these are not the times when you can be completely oblivious to whatever is happening around you. And you can just, you know, like this, you can just go enter your office, do your work, get up and go and live your lives.

    But one should be actually looking constantly at developing themselves as a professional. Keep on adding value into your own personality also. And that is what we try to do as a law firm as well. Probably, I would say the trajectories may be different, but the paths are the same ultimately.

    So, as far as our clients are concerned, yes, you are right. People are trying to create sustainable business models, and there is a huge concentration now on whether people are able to see you as an ethical business with sound governance models, sustainability models. So institutions, organizations, even smaller startups are also very conscious about this nowadays. And that is the way to go. I think the awareness that is now there, generally in the market regarding certain issues, especially environmental issues, there is a huge push towards creating sustainable models.

    When it comes to strategies, I’d like to ask about the base strategy you follow to take care of your own health, mental well-being, and also that of your team. Running a successful law firm obviously comes with pressure and challenges, so how do you overcome those? What kind of practices, trainings, or interactions do you use to ensure that everyone’s mental and physical health is taken care of, with the support and trust you’ve built within the team?

    Since the very beginning of my Gravitas Legal journey, or rather since the very beginning of my career, I’ve been very clear that I don’t carry my work home. By that I don’t for a moment mean that I don’t end up working at home sometimes, but I try to not discuss work at home, because if my family tends to get entangled in my work and if I carry my workplace stress home, then the office hours just keep on elongating. So I’ve tried to do that since the very beginning. I try to keep my Saturdays and Sundays very sacrosanct. It’s an effort, it’s an ongoing effort, but I try to ensure that I’m able to find clear me time or my family time on a very regular basis. My rules with my team are very clear that I will only ask you to work if I am working myself. So if I’m not working beyond 6 or 7 in the evening, they can also head home, enjoy life, enjoy whatever time that we can get.

    From an organization’s perspective, we try to set up a town hall every month or so, where we can just discuss things. It’s a great way to interact among different offices, and we try to discuss other things generally.

    In our town halls, we get to know so much about individuals that we are working with, rather than just the professionals. We found that one of us is a national-level athlete, for example. One of us was a great singer and an instrument player.

    So, in order to break the monotony of work, we try and make these efforts. Then we also try that, on a very regular basis, we do one or two youngster-type holidays, where we drive to the mountains and go to very difficult places where there is a lot of adventure and where everybody’s an equal. These are the kinds of things, at least stress busters, that we try to implement at the office. Generally also, we try to keep a very calm and casual environment in the office where people don’t feel over-pressurized. There is always pressure, there is always stress in the practice of law.

    There is no doubt about it, but at the same time these are the efforts that we try to make, and it’s a constant effort again, because times keep changing. There are a few months when there is no breathing space at all and there is constant struggle, there is no clock.

    Things like those happen, but then we try to manage our work well, and we try and find as much time as individuals also in our own lives.

    Get in touch with Varij Sharma –

  • Blending Advocacy, Strategy, and Technology in Modern Litigation – Kunal Sinha, Independent Litigation and Dispute Resolution Counsel.

    Blending Advocacy, Strategy, and Technology in Modern Litigation – Kunal Sinha, Independent Litigation and Dispute Resolution Counsel.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    With over eight years of experience appearing before the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court, and various tribunals, you have had a diverse legal journey. Given all that, when did your interest in law first develop? What inspired you to choose this field, especially considering that law was not always a highly sought-after career?

    Yes, absolutely. I think if I have to go back in time, it is around my high school and why I chose law. I had a keen sense of justice. I wanted to do the right thing, stand up for what’s right. More than anything, I was also, I believe, influenced by a lot of novels and movies. It would instill a lot of pride in me when I saw a lawyer really fighting for justice on screen, you know, things like those.

    So those were the points which sort of nudged me in this direction to explore more about it. Later on, I always had an inherent attraction towards psychology. I used to read a lot of Sigmund Freud and criminal psychology and other things, just out of interest. And somehow, at that time, I think especially around the time when I was graduating high school, things were really looking up. A lot of law schools were opening. Especially, what really I think made a difference in my life personally is that around that time Jindal Global Law School really came up, and I was really in awe reading about it. And so Jindal sort of pulled me in this direction.

    I also cleared the CLAT exam. I hope it’s the same exam now. And so I cleared one of these NLUs. And you know, the first week I was like, no, I’m going to drop out of law, because it brought me back to the things which I hated the most: monotony. The way it was taught there in the government institution was a lot of just reading out things. The professor would come and everybody would start taking notes, and I was like, what is happening? Why can’t we just share the notes online or come to what’s important?

    Maybe talk about law. Talk about how you apply law instead of just everybody copying the exact same thing which the professor narrates. I found it extremely useless, the way of teaching, the traditional way of teaching. Then I moved to Jindal Global Law School, and I was really impressed by the way they were teaching.

    It was a lot of hypothetical, research-oriented, open-book examinations, no note-taking. Notes were up to you, how you wanted to take them. There would be slides shared after class, so you already had everything that had been taught to you. So a lot of technologically advanced ways of teaching, which I think mirrored a lot of universities abroad, and we had a lot of faculty from abroad as well. So it was just all those mixes of things which made me understand law, and that initial attraction happened, that pulled me into the career. It wouldn’t have been possible if it wasn’t for my alma mater.

    And especially the way technology was used, and the break from monotony of just remembering case laws, citations, or sections. I mean, we had open-book exams, so all the questions were very hypothetical. I would just conclude this by saying that it’s a mix of a lot of legal dramas I saw in movies, novels, inclination towards criminal psychology, and a contribution of the university. All of them played a role.

    Strictly from a point of view of going to university for a job, I think that wasn’t my intention. I really liked it. And my family, we come from a sort of background where engineering plus MBA is equal to an IT job, something like that. So it was a tried and tested path for success. You try to do IIT, then IIM, and then you get a great job, then you move to the US, and you settle. That was sort of the ladder in which my family saw success. So this was really a breaking-tradition sort of thing for me to do law.

    From breaking traditions at home to experiencing a diverse environment in your law program, do you think this influenced the diversity in your practice as well? When you interact with peers or colleagues and notice the differences in approach or understanding, how do you encourage and motivate yourself in such situations? Additionally, how have you brought the learnings from your alma mater into your practice, and how have you implemented these experiences in running your own law firm?

    Again, it’s very difficult to word it in a few sentences, but I would say it’s a contribution of a lot of things. Let’s say, the first limb of your question about my colleagues, I would say that all my colleagues have been extremely, extremely smart, winners of different moot courts and all when we were in university.

    So, a lot of friends and everything. I think the difference which I saw was that they had a more structured way of growing in their profession. And a lot of structured internships, a lot of structured interviews to get a job and everything.

    Well, I wanted my early twenties to be about exploration. So, that way I differentiated from my friends. It’s definitely better to have more structured planning and a more concrete way of progressing in a career than just going out there in the world and just seeing what comes your way.

    So definitely, I think when I was just in law school, I think every year, like the first year I would want to be a corporate lawyer, second year I would want to be something else. So I could never really have a static thing in my mind. What happened was during the internships, I interned with IndusLaw, ITC, different places in different capacities.

    And I enjoyed the Patiala House Court trial matters the most. While talking to you, I think a lot of self-reflection is happening. And I think, again, the answer is monotony. So every day you end up learning something new, interacting with newer clients.

    So that way I got pulled towards litigation. It wasn’t my first preference in law school because I wanted to get a more stable income career and everything. So a lot of good fortune to have landed in chambers where I was not treated just like a junior or just like a person who does research.

    All the seniors I have met were very, very good mentors. And I think spending time as a mentee during those formative years is so important and depends on your luck as well to fall in these kinds of chambers. But that person can really pull you up and teach you a lot, or you can just do a dedicated task every day.

    And you may not grow at the same speed as somebody whose mentor really wants to help. So what I really realized is that a lot of your growth is not just merit, it’s a lot of relationship building. How you come across to your mentor, how much trust he has in you. So this trust starts from very basic things, like if your senior has asked you to come to court at nine and you are there at 8.45 every day, every time, you never miss a date. Little things really make a big difference. And then they start trusting you with bigger cases, start telling you to handle clients yourself. So a lot of my experience and confidence came because of my seniors who handheld me in different areas.

    So that being said, while you were establishing your career, how soon did you decide that you would go for independent practice? Because there is a lot of planning that goes in, even when you are working with or for someone, you start planning for that. So what was that particular reason or maybe what kind of thought went into deciding this factor so early in your career that you wanted to have your independent practice?

    So it was just, let’s say, more like a breakfast conversation. One of the designated seniors, now she’s a very good lady lawyer in the Supreme Court, and what she told me was that you can very well be a part of the chamber, we’ll refer you cases, you do that, do my case, and time will fly and you’ll be in your forties and you’ll still be here.

    She said, take the leap, ask your seniors to refer you cases. Open up your thing, and instead of spending time with us, go and pitch to the government, PSUs, or other places. Spend your time pitching and not in the way of asking for a job, but more like getting an empanelment and an association.

    And she said that associations never die. You’ll always be our friend in this community, but what really matters is that you tend to be comfortable. So once you’re comfortable, you might as well reach your forties, and there won’t be a day dedicated like, okay, this day he’s getting independent. So she was like, if you’re just waiting for that spark or that amazing muharat or something like that, that day is not going to happen, and you just take the leap now. And the best time to take a leap is when you have certain savings, I think.

    So you have a little bit of savings, you know you can survive for the next six months. Take the leap. Most likely, in six months, you won’t be that profitable. But these things only start coming into action when you really go independent. And all these seniors, they were also reminiscing the days they chose to be independent.

    And she said that there were times that she used to cry because she couldn’t pay the rentals or the fees of the clerk. But she held herself strong. She managed, pushed through it. And again, a lot of focus on relationship building, meeting people. Those things are very, very important.

    So it was sort of, let’s say, a cushion which I got from my seniors in the initial days. My best clients, the highest-paying clients, were the referred clients from my senior. I don’t think there was any other way I would have reached these clients if it wasn’t for my seniors. So a lot of trust, a lot of confidence they had in me to have referred to me like that.

    Having such mentors and seniors is also very good luck because it is not easy to find one. In very early stages, like when you started, even before that, you worked with several companies and a variety of law firms, both nationally and internationally, in different capacities. What was the most valuable learning that you had during that time? How did that learning shape your understanding not only about the foundation of the law but also to pave the way for the foundation of your independent practice as well? How has that worked out for you, other than your seniors and mentors being in the picture?

    Right, with respect to that, especially, I think the younger you are, it impacts you a lot more, like your first jobs would impact. The first year of working has a lot of impact and then it just gets routine.

    So there is a very significant impact in the initial years. And I think I was working in Toronto with a barrister there, and a lot of things which I incorporated in terms of, I don’t know if it is relevant to this question, but I see a lot of transparency.

    There is a lesser senior-junior gap in these law firms abroad, especially in Toronto, the US culture in general. And there is a lot of opportunity to just meet them without that fear of talking to a very senior person, which I see quite visible in the law firms here, or the kind of practice there is in chambers here in Delhi. So as soon as that comfort level is there, a lot of transparency in terms of what a person will be able to do and what he won’t be able to do is there instead.

    And you can also ask doubts. I think that is also one of the issues which I faced in a law firm here, that comfort level is not built where the associate can just go up to the partner and say, I have this doubt, can you clarify? What exactly do you need from me? What output can I give?

    And that person is working to the best of his ability. And there is this gap, this unsaid hierarchy, where you have to put your head down. So that sort of thing, which I did not experience in the beginning, gave me a lot of knowledge and understanding with respect to speaking directly to the senior and really discussing things with the senior. And I wasn’t just like a cog in the machine, if that is the right metaphor, where you are just doing one part and you are just showing up and doing your thing. That freedom, that open-door policy, is something which I experienced early on and I really incorporated that. Other than that, a lot of things like, I think somewhere in India, we have this colonial, British-era, archaic way of writing judgments, or these judgments which are often published and all that.

    It is so complex. It is far away from the comprehension of a layman. And I feel a certain level of clarity and predictability and structure, which I learned there, and I found it missing here. So I tend to incorporate that in whatever I can do at present in my small office.

    I try to incorporate things which I learned of transparency and making your clients understand their petitions and not get swayed away by fancy legal lingo. Especially when discussing contracts and everything, I try to really simplify for the person who is sitting in front of me, for the client, and even how I would present myself in court would also be a lot simpler. I wouldn’t just go around beating around the bush with respect to fancy words and everything. So this is something which I have incorporated.

    You have also been empanelled with the Punjab National Bank and Central Warehousing Corporation, where you regularly handle high-stake commercial and civil disputes. What kind of challenges do you see or face while managing these disputes, keeping in mind that you work for the government sector there? And there are multiple stakeholders who are also involved, so you have to take care of all the sides related to that particular challenge. So in these kinds of disputes, how do you work around them and how do you convince or formulate a strategy for such high-stake issues?

     Like most of the government PSUs I have worked in,  there have been times I’ve been on the other side. I would really think that we have to be very, very pro solution oriented and going through litigation is tedious.  The government doesn’t really want that.

    They want solutions, they want settlements. A person as a lawyer, one’s duty is not to just be very good at presenting yourself in the court. It’s to have that intention, to be solution oriented, to tell the people responsible that this is the realistic judgment.

    This is the realistic order we are about to get or we’ll get in future. And this is where we are.   So why not just try to get to a solution now instead of waiting for the court to take its due time to come to an order. So especially with all these government PSUs, my intention is to have an arbitration clause. 

     Their intention also, it reflects that they want to avoid litigation, they want to go into arbitration. They want to have quick redressal,  and as a lawyer, as their panel counsel, my job is to ensure that  the least amount of litigation happens and we can come to an understanding at the earliest moment.

    Thanks for sharing those insights. So when we started the conversation, you talked about data privacy and other aspects, and your background is also in data protection and privacy management, along with the training in Canada and Europe. How do you see the kind of evolving landscape for the Indian DPDP Act and where do you see that we stand when we compare these kinds of acts, especially the new technology-driven acts around the world and what India is doing? What kind of difference do you see, and how do you make sure that you practice it in the best format possible, keeping in mind your international clients as well?

    Well, I really think our act mirrors and reflects the GDPR, which is in Europe, and a lot of concepts are there. So very, very similar, very progressive. But just coming to the ground reality, I think this conversation should be more reflective of what really happens.

    And in our practice, what I have seen is a lot of sharing of documents within law firms, within lawyers, through WhatsApp, through emails. So one should be really, really careful with all that, about sharing confidential information, even amongst our peers.

    And first, that cultural shift has to be there to really understand that there will be consequences. In general conversations, I see a lot of lawyers talk in the cafeteria, talking about their cases. One has to be very, very careful not to disclose your clients, not to disclose anything personal, or not even say something from which a person can really predict who I am speaking about.

    So that cultural shift has to be there with respect to privacy, and I think that is missing. Also, the way our websites are made, or our shopping websites are made, or any website for that matter, it is not humanly possible to read the cookie, the privacy policy, etc.

    So really, there is a great disbalance. You can take consent from a person on a 300-page document within one second, and a person just has to click OK. It is not humanly possible to read 300 pages before entering a website. So again, regulation has to come from the side of the government or from an authority, which we are doing, because it is not a contract between equals.

    Because if you are one big corporation, you have so much power. You have great lawyers to draft these contracts, and you expect a layman who is buying maybe a golf club, and then he will have to sign these pages, to just click OK. In a way, it is implied consent to accepting their policies.

    So there is definitely a lot of disbalance. And what I have seen is that I go to a shop and they ask for your number so easily, like it is nothing, like I have to give it. They don’t even bother with your consent.

    If you need the bill, you need to give the number. I am like, what kind of a relationship is this? You are putting pressure that if I need the bill, I need to give you the number, and then the number is just available out there, and you will be getting random calls and promotions.

    So where do we draw the line? Why don’t we have that power as consumers to say no, to say to the company that, okay, forget me, erase my data, whatever you have on me? These provisions are there, but to what extent are we really incorporating them and to what extent are we really educating the consumers about them?

    I mean, there is a huge gap. And I think as consumers, we are on the losing end of this battle. The way private data is shared, I think everybody would have experienced talking amongst their friends about a certain product and then seeing the advertisement of that online all of a sudden.

    So who is listening to what? To what extent is our data being shared? There is a lot of gray area in this, and there is absolutely a lack of transparency and a huge imbalance of power between us and the technology, the people out there who want the data. So regulation has to come from the government, from the authorities, so that there is some fear in the people or in the corporations or technology-related companies to be careful with the data.

     So true that we should be aware of our privacy as well as the child’s privacy. Nobody talks about child rights either, which is something absolutely missing from what we are doing, although it is there in the act. But if we are not aware of our own privacy, then how are we going to be inspired by child rights and other aspects.

     Absolutely. I think that it is just that the act, that legislation has to reflect or be incorporated in societal culture. And there’s seriously a big gap when it comes to that.

    Everything, even if you visit somebody’s apartment these days, they need your phone number, data, everything to let you in. And then you have been profiled. And you don’t know who’s buying this profile. How many times have you visited the hospital? Maybe the insurance company is buying the profile.

    So there’s a lot of sharing of data which a person has not expressly consented to. Consent can be skewed in a way that you click okay on a cookie policy or something like that and then, in a way, legally the companies are protected. But is it really a balanced contract?

    I don’t think so. The consumers, the regular people, have been taken for a ride.

    Keeping all this kind of technological advent and the kind of issues that arise with it and the regulations that are required, you have extensively worked in this field as well. How do you keep yourself ahead of the times and learn about all these things? Where do you learn from? What kind of research do you do around this, and what will be your advice to the younger generation who are entering this particular field in this specifically technologically advanced era? Things have changed before COVID and after COVID, the kind of world we are living in. So how do you see yourself, your practice, your firm, and how do you see the young generation learning from it?

     Right at the outset, I would say the old schoolers, the law firms, are hesitant. Even today they are very non-AI, they have these internal policies, but AI is so powerful. It’s not so easy to just reject it outright. The more realistic thing will be to adopt it and regulate it.

    And I think the younger generation, we know that you are using AI, we know that you are using it for research and drafting and whatnot. So there doesn’t have to be shame in it. Be outright. Be transparent with your bosses and professors and say that this is the kind of research you’ve collated, and as long as you’re using a tool, do good work.

    That’s what matters. As long as that tool is not misused to the extent of plagiarism, I think it’s absolutely fine. One should adopt it. I have been using AI tools for my scheduling. So imagine earlier if you typed so-and-so versus the state, versus the case number, et cetera.

    Now I can just, I have this app. I can just update my data, say put it up in my calendar for so-and-so date. So everybody’s using it and younger people are using it. It’s a great tool. So imagine going through a contract of 200 pages and you really want to understand if there are any loopholes, what exactly the termination conditions are.

    For instance, if you just go to the termination clause, there will be clauses talking about termination. But you need to really holistically understand the contract because a lot of times these clauses have a bearing on each other.

    And a lot of times these clauses are extensions of each other. So you cannot read these clauses in isolation. Let’s say one person uses AI to really understand the termination clause, or let’s say whatever period, indemnity clause in totality, and see how it assists you.

    So use AI like an assistant. You wouldn’t put your assistant’s work directly to the client. You’ll ask a paralegal to help you out and then filter things out for you, and then you apply your legal mind to it and then take it ahead. So as long as you’re using it as a paralegal or an AI agent, it’s fine.

    It’s absolutely fine. There’s no shame around it. I know my partners are really upset because of some interns who used AI and found these AI-hallucinated case laws, which do not exist. And this I’m talking about in some tier-one law firm.

    So it is concerning, but use it as an agent. If, let’s say, your intern brings you a case law, you don’t just directly sign it, right? You would go to SCC Online, a more legitimate sort of legal resource, and cross-check it. But, in essence, I would just like to say be adaptable.

    See how the situation is changing. Very soon there won’t be a lot of paralegals. As a job, it may become obsolete. Stenographers may become obsolete. So be realistic. There is an aspect of what’s morally correct and what’s not. Let’s not go there at the moment.

    But what’s real is that yes, jobs are going to move, a lot of clerical jobs will go away. So be mindful of that and use this as an opportunity to do really good legal work. Be better than your seniors because they didn’t have these tools. Now your senior would’ve taken a day to read a contract.

    You can do it much faster and try to do the law analytical stuff because your clerical stuff is taken care of. So use it like you have hired an intern or a junior paralegal and then be the person who vets everything before forwarding it to the court or client.

     Thank you for talking about all these aspects of AI and how to use those kinds of tools for your own benefit and for your work’s benefit. It has been a very enriching conversation with you where you have talked about your understanding and the way your seniors have helped you, all of it hopefully is going to help our learners to understand how they should pave their way in being not only first generation lawyer, but I would say first generation using technology at this level because this is something which is absolutely new for legal fraternity, so thank you for this conversation.

    Just adding one last thing with respect to the AI, it’s bridging the gap. Imagine if nobody has the excuse now that I do not have good professors. I do not have a good education, my college isn’t good enough.

    You have these sources, you can get access to a lot of great sources online, so there is no excuse now. A level playing field has been made because of AI and technology. So you can be anyone, you can be a first-generation or third-generation lawyer. Now the third-generation lawyers have their own challenges.

    Being under the shadow of someone, someone a great lawyer sometimes. So that kind of sometimes limits the third or the fourth-generation lawyer. So a lot of these seniors, which I know, have sent their kids to absolutely different chambers.

    Far away from their chamber so that they learn to stand on their own feet. I see a lot of LinkedIn posts about first-generation, second-generation differences. It’s not as rosy as people think to be a third-generation lawyer or a fourth-generation lawyer. One always has to show merit and everybody, in a sense, is a first-generation lawyer.

    This is not like a food business or a restaurant that, okay, it just came to you. Everybody has to show merit. Everybody has to show their skills to really last in this profession. So, in essence, now that AI is there and other technology, which makes it easier to navigate cases, easier to do research.

    One should learn all that and this is a great time to be a lawyer in a way that now you have a level playing field, you can go against the best.

    Get in touch with Kunal Sinha –

  • Inside the practice of a First generation Litigator & Supreme Court AOR – Gagan Narang, Partner at Triumvir Law.

    Inside the practice of a First generation Litigator & Supreme Court AOR – Gagan Narang, Partner at Triumvir Law.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Let’s start with your remarkable, successful career of being an Advocate on Record and partner at Triumvir Law. Looking back, what was the initial motivation behind pursuing the career in a law and was there any specific driving factor that you chose this field?

     So to start with, my parents, my family is a family of professionals and that is where the work ethic or the drive to be a professional.  Both my parents are doctors. Having said that, I was always into multiple different domains. I was always multifaceted, having multiple interests. Was involved in quizzing, debating, in fact was involved in the equity markets, had an interest in the equity markets in very early years as well. And that is where somehow the journey towards law shaped in, because I understood law to be a profession wherein you’ll get exposure to all kinds of environments, all the kinds of businesses, all the kinds of different facets of the world where every case in the legal field is a new case. Every case is unique in its own way, and that is the advantage that the legal profession gives. It keeps  things interesting, it keeps things fresh. That’s how my career shaped towards law in the first place.

    Also, I was kind of a rebel as a kid, did not wanna get into medicine because of those reasons as well.

    Thank you for openly sharing your decision to not pursue medicine despite your parents being doctors. You made it to Gujarat National Law University that shaped your legal and business acumen? Starting with a top law firm in Mumbai to now leading your own litigation practice in New Delhi, how was that journey? As a first-generation lawyer, what challenges did you face, and how did you overcome them?

     So, let’s put the first generation thing first. Multiple times in the process there have been days when you think that maybe a profession in the medical field would’ve been better because obviously there would’ve been some legacy that I would’ve carried. But having said that, the work ethic that was instilled or the work ethic that was put into me and the way I’ve seen my parents go about their days right from 8 in the morning to maybe 11 in the night. I’ve seen them working and that’s where the idea of hard work that is required in your professional field came into picture, and that is probably what helped in getting into the GNLU, that is Gujarat National Law University as well. 

    Everything basically came in a flow, so I started off at LKS – Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan and it was through the college, got college placement, went to Bombay, did tax advisory for a year or so. Tax was considered to be the toughest field of law that existed while we were in college and even today in practice I see there is a niche that’s been created about tax. And a big advantage that my experience that LKS gave me was that I understood probably what people or what lawyers don’t even want to get into because it’s a very specific, very niche field. A criminal lawyer is still comfortable doing civil law. I’ll not say anything is easy or tough, but with due respect to everyone, there are multiple lawyers dealing in different domains that do not actually want to get into tax.

    Working at LKS gave me that exposure and gave me that understanding that the toughest, probably the perceived toughest facet of law can also be understood, just by applying yourself to it. Something about GNLU, GNLU is one of those unique law schools which allows you to study multiple domains of law. So there is a BBA LLB which I pursued then there is a B.Com LLB that is going on. There is a BSc LLB  as well. There is a BA LLB, normally law schools have BA LLB, BBA LLB so they have multiple facets. Additionally, there are various co-curricular  activities, there are Interdisciplinary schools such as Center for Sports Law, Center for Public International Law. So there were a lot of opportunities that came my way thanks to these centers and thanks to these programs that the college provided. While pursuing all these courses, you always have the option to learn more, to understand more assets and not just understand the law in itself, but understand various domains as well.

    That is where the institute helped me a lot, besides, GNLU is always very proactive in moot court competitions, in debates, in parliamentary debates in MUNs as well. So that is another facet which helped in developing that personality, the exposure was always there. No matter where I was sitting in a remote corner in the Western part of the country, the exposure was always there to learn more and gain more knowledge in the journey.

    You have been representing clients both nationally and internationally in arbitrations, including obviously the cases that you have represented in Abu Dhabi, which was a SAP company in an international arbitration.

    What were some significant challenges that you encountered during those cross- border arbitrations and what unique difficulties do you see while you are doing those cross-border arbitrations and the way you strategize to overcome them?

      Cross-border arbitrations are a unique ballgame. When we understand a domestic arbitration or when we understand the way arbitration is practiced in India, mostly the arbitrators or mostly the tribunals are either retired judges or some significant authoritative figures who know the system that is applicable in a domestic arbitration very well. The system that is the Indian law very well. When you come to an international arbitration, the ballgame shifts completely. First and foremost, the arbitrators mostly, up to a certain extent, are mostly lawyers themselves.

    More importantly, these arbitrators mostly are from neutral backgrounds and neutral jurisdiction. So they per se might themselves not know the procedures that are involved in the applicable procedural law or the substantive law. They might not be privy to the substantive law in the first place.

    It becomes very important for the practitioner, for the council to specify, to take the tribunal along with them in the substantive law and in the procedural law because the arbitrator sitting might not correct in a domestic arbitration. An arbitrator might correct you if you’re going wrong in the procedure at least. An international arbitrator, the arbitrator themselves might be new or might be knowing the substantive legal part of it less, and therefore you need to take the arbitrator along with yourself. The second and more important facet is there is always a language or a communication gap that will exist. There is a specific way in which English is pronounced by us, which is Indian English. When you’re sitting in an international arbitration, the accent changes, the pronunciation changes and the understanding of the accent also changes. So it is very important to not just be clear in what you’re saying or what you’re thinking, but also to articulate your thoughts in a much better and a much simpler manner so that it’s conveyed properly to the opposite party, to the arbitrator, to everybody.

    This becomes an important aspect there. It is very important to be a very good listener in an international arbitration as well, because you have to be on your toes to decide your strategy later on, and for that you need to understand what your opposite party is saying or what is falling from the tribunal as well. These are the three observations that go besides the legal parts of it, but coming to the legal parts.

    The challenges always exist because when you’re doing an international arbitration, the domain entirely shifts. Now, the law that you might be dealing with, the substantive law that you might be dealing with is not the local law of your in-line that you practiced since whenever you started your legal education.

    So what happens is that you need to be very aware, you need to be very thorough and very well researched about the laws that you’re dealing with. So for example, the arbitration that you were talking about, the local law was of Abu Dhabi or United Arab Emirates. Now, a lot of facets came from Muslim law. A lot of facets came from Islamic law, per se, Sharia law per se. And when we initially got on to it we were not very privy to it. It did not come naturally to us, so we also had to go through a lot of details. We had to also go through the law in many details. Had it been a common law country, I would’ve said it still comes naturally because following common law, you know, the flow, you know the logic behind things.

    But when it comes to a country where the procedure, where the substantial law is entirely different from yours, comes, you need to be very thorough and very well researched in that aspect as well. So these are the few challenges that you face now.

    You have an expertise which spans through commercial litigation, international arbitration, as well as white collar disputes, which are often considered very high risk, and obviously confidentiality becomes a very important corner store for white collar crime.

    What kind of key factors do you focus on while you are dealing with these kinds of areas of law, which are not only very, very confidentiality centric, as well as privacy centric , because confidentiality is for the whole case, and privacy is for the parties. So how do you deal with all these?

    What I basically focus on, whichever field it is, is to break it down to the simplest molecule possible, to the simplest form of a thing possible. And when you come to white collar and you try to break it down, as I see there are two elements involved.

    There is one, a business or a company transaction that is happening and a company’s interest that is happening. And the other aspect is basically the criminal laws that are applicable to the same. So when we look at a white collar crime, it is a company doing a monetary transaction wherein the financial interests of the company are involved and maybe some element of criminal law to achieve those financial goals.

    When you are defending a company, or the corporate or the financial transaction, it is simpler because the transaction may be good, may go in your favor, the transaction may go against you but what is at stake is only the monetary aspect of it, which while is important to the company’s interest. Does not paramount the personal interest of the directors or the stakeholders sitting in the company. When you deal with white collars, the parameter expands and the personal aspects become more important because there could be a lifting of corporate will, there are criminal laws involved, so there will always be a liability or a penal liability that can arise in the form of imprisonment, in the form of fines, penalties on the directors, on the shareholders, on key managing personnel as well.

    What is important in the first place is to understand that most of these people, if there is an element or if there is an allegation of a crime that is alleged might not…, the boundaries of law are so thin and so bleak that they might not themselves know when they have actually transcended the boundary.

    Something which might be very obvious or something which might be very simple for someone, that person might have transcended the boundary a bit, and it becomes important in the first place to explain in a very normal, in a very conversational manner, without losing the confidence of the client, that there might be an issue or where the issue first or foremost arises.

    Obviously there will be transactions where there is a willful default and there is a willful transaction. But when there is not, it’s important to explain to the client where that particular transaction has happened. In other transactions, there might just be that there is an allegation, but there is actually no substance to the allegation and it becomes important to explain considering the Indian judicial sphere and considering the pendency in India that there will be light at the end of the tunnel. There will be justice at the end of the day. And these are procedural regulatory issues that will be handed in due course of time just by putting the best foot forward or the most transparent foot forward.

    One more aspect that is important to be understood is.

    Normally when a person thinks of crime, the person automatically becomes defensive. Even  as individuals, when these clients are in front of you, it becomes very important to get the truth or the exact truth out of them. So you need to be very careful with what you ask. Sometimes they’ll not tell you the entire thing because either they want to hide something or they don’t consider it to be important themselves.

    So it is important for you to ask the right questions, to get the right answers, and then formulate the strategy accordingly.

    In addition to all these kinds of legal responsibilities, you also have developed business for yourself, administrative tasks that you have taken up, and you are managing your Delhi office as well.

    How do you manage all of this and over the years, how has your role evolved in each of the segments of the organization? What kind of experiences are there in those challenges that you have overcome and the roles that you have kept on changing over time?  

     The challenge is an everyday thing. It’s still a challenge. It continues being a challenge, and I think it’ll continue being a challenge forever. And that’s the best part of it because every day when you deal with a challenge, you successfully come out of it. You feel you have achieved something which will help you sleep better that night . Having said that, I joined Triumvir Law back in 2021 when it was a smaller organization compared to what we have now, but we were gaining a reputation. The organization was gaining reputation in leaps and bounds back then as well. When I joined, my tasks were cut out very clearly for me, which was to start with making a base for the firm .

    And to also handle the litigation part of it because Anubhav, Akash, my partners were themselves getting overloaded with the kind of work that was coming in that is exactly where Anubhab reached out and asked me to join in, being friends since almost 2015, it was a no-brainer to go ahead. Since I left my firm role in 2018, I had only worked as an advocate. It was more about the legal thing, more about the matters, more about the cases rather than about a firm, rather than about running an organization or rather than about thinking of the business aspect of it. So the first challenge that came into picture and the challenge that keeps on probably repeating every day when I deal with it is to consider it to also be a business, to consider it to also be a profession that you are there to grow, that you’re there to make money, and not just to sit there as an advocate dealing with the legal aspects of it. That’s a dilemma that will always be there because unfortunately in India, what the problem is that legal fees are always considered to be a cost or a liability. So you have to make the client also understand how you become useful to the client in the longer run, and that is the transition that you achieve from an advocate to say a contributing member in a firm and a partner in a firm to bridge that challenge.

    A lot of my time being in courts, being litigating a lot of my time, always went into the court work because that is how court life is. So starting the day at say 10.15, 10 AM or 10.30 in the morning from court, you never know. Your matter might reach in two minutes, your matter might reach in four, six hours at 4:00 PM as well, and a lot of the time is wasted.

    So you have to be very careful how you spend time with increased responsibilities, with the responsibility of building an office, the responsibility of building a base, growing the base in Delhi. Time management has become a key issue. Time management becomes the biggest issue right now, and it’s very important, the way I look at, it’s very important to establish systems for each and everything in place so that almost every exercise is automated to the best possible manner.

    Secondly, it becomes very important to have the right personnel to work with you and develop a team to work with you so that 80% or 60% of your responsibility in one facet is covered by the team. And then obviously you are there to oversee, you are there to manage whatever is required. There will be clients who will always require you to be present on board, but it is important to make the client also understand that the team is good enough or maybe better than yourself to handle the cases themselves as well.

    But you’ll be there whenever you need to be there. Similarly in the administrative part, also in the business development part, it’s important to make the client understand that the primary point of contact will be handy enough and will be a good substitute for me.

    When you have those systems in place, it becomes easier with passage of time and that is what we have seen in bigger firms as well.

    So you have transitioned from so many roles and kept on learning and enjoying every bit of it. While doing so you have also advised on online gaming platforms, obviously, on legal matters and other forms such as digital wallet regulations and RBI licensing.

    Given the kind of nature of the sector and the new challenges that it faces every day, particularly around regulatory compliances, how have you set your agenda of breaking it down again, in your own words to singular molecules and finding those solutions for your clients who are actually involved in these kinds of gaming platforms?

     So sports law or say gaming law is a niche field in law itself, which is still up and coming. Having said that, it’s not something like, say, a tax law, which has entirely a different kind of practice. A sports field or a gaming law field is an interplay of multiple different facets of traditional laws.

    Basically, there will be some element of the company’s law involved there. There will be some corporate advisory involved there. There will be some element of litigation that will be involved there, and there will obviously be regulatory compliances and tax compliances, so on and so forth that are inward.

    For these kinds of transactions when we were handling, the most important part where in the legal bit, the litigation mind came into play was the discourses that the Supreme Court had over a game of chance or a game of skill. So this law had been evolving and is still probably evolving to certain extent, wherein what is considered a game of chance and what is a game of skill, what element of a game of chance will be allowed, what element and to what extent the game of skill will be allowed to say be legalized in a country or be considered legal.

    And there will always be games wherein there will be a mixture of both game of chance and game of skill and the important question to be answered in all of these for all of our clients would’ve been that a particular game that they are proposing mostly and specifically in the online domain.

    Whether that game is a pure game of chance, then obviously the law doesn’t allow it. You have to remove it, you have to either find a way around it or you have to structure it in a manner that there is a level of skill involved. Secondly, if there is a mixture or an interplay of game of chance and a game of skill, then whether that interplay can be put in a manner to state that it is more of a game of skill, and that is why it can be allowed in the country. Having said that, now where the complexity or where the problem becomes multifold is that sports laws or gaming per se, comes into the state list. Now there is a national list, there is a union list, and there is a state list and there are concurrent list.

    So these facets fall under the state list. And every state has different kind of legislations on it. There are states who have legalized or who have allowed certain games. there are states which completely banned even game of challenge and game of skills as well.

    Now when you are dealing with an online platform, the other thing that becomes important is where do these games actually happen? Or which are the platforms that you go on? So even today, if you see an Android Playstore, you’ll not find a game of skill also on an online platform, a game like, I don’t want name, but let’s take an example of a Dream 11 per se

    or My 11 circle, which is currently the IPL is going on My 11 circle is the sponsor for IPL, Dream 11 has been a sponsor for the Indian team, so definitely the operations that they’re involved in are very much legal, considered to be legal in India. However, still Android Playstore does not have the kind of apps there because there are Android policies or regulatory policies which do not allow Android to have those games on their app store. So that is where the lawyer’s role comes into picture, or our role came into picture to understand what are the regulations? Why are the regulations in a manner, if possible, to make the platforms also understand whether these can be allowed or not, or to find a way around them as well.

    And an interesting element that exists in this field is that the tax aspect of this field is still under question. There was a giant casino company in India that has been called by the tax authorities and has been asked to pay taxes on the entire sum that a person gets as winnings and not just the winning aspect itself.

    And if you actually calculate the tax on the entire sum then probably the platform will be left or the company will be left with nothing to show in their books and they might even go bankrupt.

    So this is an interesting evolving element. We’ll have to see where the Supreme Court takes it or where the laws in India take it, probably, there could be some form of government interference there as well, or the government stepping in to allow certain things. These are the evolving aspects of it, but that is where sports law or gaming law is there.

     In India’s evolving legal landscape like with cryptocurrencies being taxed despite not being legal tender, navigating grey areas is key. With your background in both BBA and law, has this unique combination shaped your litigation practice and business development approach? Do you feel that a business degree like a BBA or MBA offers an edge in understanding the commercial aspects of running a legal chamber?

    Has it helped you in strategizing and scaling your practice over the years? And overall, how has this blend of business and law influenced the way you approach the profession today?

    Okay, I’ll start from a personal example, and I know a lot of my friends in the legal fraternity who have been doing that, and probably this will also be a suggestion for all the upcoming lawyers , especially once they go independent.

    When you start and when you have joined a firm and somebody else is paying you a retainer or a compensation.

    And there is a fixed element to it, it becomes easier for you because all you need to do is tell your one savings bank account details to the person that salary or compensation will be transferred there. However, once you go independent or when you’re starting a firm, all of these things, when you’re doing, now, it becomes important for you to understand how a business runs and understand what is the importance of a current account, what is the importance of different business accounts, to separate, as they say, your personal from your professional. When you’re running the practice at a smaller scale, what happens is these lines get blurred a lot. Just like your time, your time also gets blurred a lot. You’re working at your will, so you’re working probably through 24 hours. Anytime, there is no personal time, there is no professional time demarcated.

    But over time, it becomes important for you to demarcate it and it’s better or the best for individuals to understand it in the beginning, get those compliances sorted in the beginning itself where a BBA comes helpful to that is BBA is basically Bachelor of Business Administration.

    You understand business organizations, business setups, very importantly and very clearly in the first place. When you have a clear cut idea, theoretical idea also what a business organization is and how different business systems work, it becomes easier for you to understand what will work for yourself or what idea can be theoretically good for you, and try and implement that practically as well.

    It becomes further more important for you to help yourself understand the client’s requirements or how the client’s organization works as well. When you have that basic idea of how businesses work. Every business might work in a different way. Every corporate client might work in a different way, but you understand where the eventual goal lies, how they distinguish their profits, how a balance sheet is made. From making a balance sheet to arriving at profits and losses to understand where the assets go, where the liabilities go, once you have sorted that out for yourself, it becomes easier for you as a litigator, as well as a corporate advisor to basically get the hang of it.

    Secondly, it plays even a bigger role when you’re in a corporate advisory sector, so supposedly we are advising on a share purchase transaction or an acquisition. Certain elements of the company’s law are very intricately connected with the finance aspects, the business administration aspect.

    And once you have that basic background, it becomes easier for you to explain to your clients also what different forms of  shares are, what are hybrid securities, all of those. And it becomes easier for you also to implement or structurize those transactions for your clients. So that is where the business BBA knowledge comes into picture and helps you with that.

    Keeping all this in mind, you were talking about when you start your own firm or when you work individually, you tend to work even for 24 hours. I would request you to talk a little bit more about the kind of mental health impact that it gives when you are under pressure while developing your litigation practice or developing your own firm. How have you taken care of that particular aspect, given the fact that your parents are doctors?

    And what is your advice to the new entrants who are so desperate in making it within overnight or something like that, that we just have to make our names bigger?

    Just to clarify, when I said 24 hours, I didn’t mean you’re working 24 hours. What I meant was your professional and your personal timings are blurred. Say a person in a job will actually come home, spend time with family, or do something personal, might go to the gym. They have their set patterns as an individual, especially freshly independent, you’ll not have those patterns.

    Or when you’re working to grow an organization at that point of time, you might blur those lines and those patterns. That is why you’ll be working in different domains and that’s what we have done and that’s what we keep doing at Triumvir Law as well. When a case needs us, when a transaction needs us to work overnight, we will still be working overnight.

    However, the attempt will always be, the aim will always be to reduce that kind of work and to form such systems that will help you in the longer run. As a freshly graduate person, as a person who has started an organization or as a person who has just gone independent, it’s easier to do that in the first place and those blurred lines help you in probably maximizing the results for yourself and to an extent satisfying the clients there. However, these will never be sustainable in the longer run. You’ll have added responsibilities. At the initial phase, your number of clients are also restricted. You can give that amount of time to a client where you can give that attention. Once you have gone a bit ahead in your journey, the number of clients will increase and automatically, if you start being available all the time, it’ll become a problem for everybody. Now, how you tackle it in the first place, you make good systems. I started earlier as well. It’s very important to form those systems so that it becomes easier for you in the longer run.

    Once you go ahead, you get, as I said earlier, you get a good team with yourself who can take away the day-to-day load from your shoulder and your inputs are required only when something new crops up in the middle. So that is where in the longer run, preparing the fresher talent in a manner that they can also independently work. They can apply themselves independently, but the work in the system becomes important.

    And most important advice to everybody will be to choose the people that you work with very properly and very wisely. I am blessed to have the kind of people that I work with, the kind of partners, the kind of team that I work with. They ensure that whenever that break is required, somebody’s there to follow up, somebody there to fill in your shoes so that you can take the burnout break. You can always enjoy that rejuvenation and be back at work while somebody’s handling the work as well. That’s the advice. That’s how I saw it in my family. That’s what I see in my partners. That’s what I see around me.

    All of us have some kind of interests, which are beyond the legal sphere. Always work on your interests. You might say a specific sport, you might not be good at it. You might be very good at it, but play that sport. I heard an influencer say this, and I was very impressed by this dialogue.

    It was actually not an influencer. I don’t remember who but yeah, in a podcast I heard this, especially in your twenties and thirties, go to that concert you wanted to go to.

    Attend that cricket match that you want to see, attend that stand-up comedy show that you want to do, whatever is your interest. Follow that as well along with your work because eventually in life you will have to compromise on that as well. So when you have that kind of time, take time out from your professional life that will help you make your professional life better in the longer.

    And although I’m sure after this answer, my partner will be complaining to me that you do nothing of that, but this is what it is.

    Keeping that in mind, I would request you to suggest or rather talk a little bit about how you have transitioned along with the technology because obviously without technology today we would not be having this conversation.

    How do you see the technology has helped you have a better representation, have better way of learning and the kind of disruptive tech that is happening today, especially AI, IOT, blockchain? How have you equipped yourself with the new understanding of this and where do you see that our legal field is moving towards, along with these kinds of technologies that are infiltrating our law fraternity as well?

    Just a disclaimer, I am very bad with modern technology. When I say very bad, I’m trying every day to adapt to more things, but not at the pace where the generations that are coming ahead will be. Having said that, we are trying to do whatever we can to reduce our burden or to reduce our workloads, and that is probably the whole aim of implementing technologies in your daily life or in your professional life. So how we normally do it or how we are trying to do it, to start with was a big transition from those hefty files to basically an iPad and a cloud account where, all your files, all your devices are scanned and stored, so you don’t need to carry those empty files to courts.

    And in the recent past, we have seen the courts also transcend towards promoting. And I have personally seen in court, in the Supreme court before the former chief justice actually asking senior designated lawyers also to follow a practice of reading the briefs on iPad and not on paper files so they can also transcend towards the newer technologies.

    That’s the basic beginning and we are still trying to harness and maximize that sphere. So that is the first place saving a lot of paper. Obviously with our workload, we are only supposed to carry one iPad now and not the entire set of files, so that is where it helps in the first place.

    Secondly, now thanks to the digitization of all the records. And neutral citations present, like the entire databases shifting to technology based data share bases. We are not required to maintain those libraries that were earlier a compulsion. Now they have over time become a luxury of sorts.

    So it is more of an interest or a hobby kind of a thing to maintain that library. Having said that, thanks to the tools that are available and thanks to technology. It’s become much easier for us to operate on devices rather than those volumes or those libraries.

    Just to add what you are saying, we have incorporated an AI platform with us. We are trying to automate the contracts that we do, to basically reduce the amount of time that we spend on it and to get the regularities sorted. That is how AI is transforming for us as well. The regular stuff is always there where we use whatever AI tools are available for say emails or drafting basic things, but in the longer run we are also looking to incorporate AI outputs into our deliverables as well.

    Get in touch with Gagan Narang –

  • Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

    Fueling the Future of Innovation Through IP Awareness and Advocacy – Nilanshu Shekhar, Founding Partner at KAnalysis

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    Let me begin by asking you about your decision to do law after having an engineering degree or academic foundation in biotechnology and industrial microbiology. What was your inspiration in bringing intellectual property into your life, and how have you taken this approach to excel in the IP domain and make it a passion?

    As it happens with everybody, the shift to intellectual property from an engineering background, or in my case, the shift from biotechnology and industrial microbiology to IP, was not planned. It happened organically, and I began my career as a patent engineer in my first organization where I was introduced to the world of IP.

    That exposure was an eye-opener for me because I realized IP was the perfect intersection of science, law, strategy, and, more importantly, business. It allowed me to stay close to innovation while also influencing how innovations are protected and commercialized. So that is something that brought me towards IP, and the interest has kept me going to date. Over time, this technical-to-legal transition has shaped my entire approach to how I view IP.

    I don’t look at innovations in isolation. I view them as a larger part of the innovation journey because it’s all incremental and doesn’t happen as a eureka moment. That mindset continues to influence how I advise my clients even today. Whether it’s a startup or a multinational trying to scale its IP, I try to see the bigger picture of what the innovation would mean to them, how it aligns with their business goals, how to strategically protect it because IP, in isolation from business, is of no use.

    That’s how my journey towards IP keeps me motivated and going strong.

    Thank you so much for bringing in this aspect of the intersection of two fields, which are absolutely niche. Way back in 2007 itself, you started KAnalysis, and right now, you have made it a thriving IP law firm. What were some of the key challenges during those early years when you started your journey with a modest three-member team and navigated it through building a firm of this size and reputation, with a mission of making an IP hub in India? How have you done it?

    Well, it has happened gradually, I would say. When we started in 2007, we were working out of a single basement with very limited resources and zero clients. So, the initial challenge was how to show your credibility. Why would anybody trust a young firm or someone who has just started?

    We focused on quality, our responsiveness, and trust, because trust is something that takes you far. Even during our initial phase, we were doing the IP work. Wherever we were trained, we were not good at starting or setting up a business, managing cash flows, or getting clients, or getting an introduction to a client. We could execute a project, we could write a patent, we could search for prior art, or we could do a lot of things, but how to convince somebody to trust you?

    So those were tough initial days, as it happens with everybody. But the real challenge started as we grew. When you try to scale, the biggest challenge is that you should not dilute your core values. Consistency and patience are key. Over time, we have invested in people, set up robust processes, and, being from an engineering background, we could incorporate and adapt technology at various levels.

    People, process, and technology, I would say, are the three pillars we have not compromised on till now. The culture is that we will not compromise on these, however big we grow, because growth at the cost of culture and quality will not last long. Over the years, it has been almost 18 years. We have built slowly and steadily, investing in people, processes, and technology.

    That’s what I claim to be my biggest challenge now. As the team grows now, we are over a hundred people. The majority of my team is in India, but a few members are spread across the globe. The second-largest team is in the US, and we have small offices spread across the globe to take care of various jurisdictions.

    Every step has a new challenge, and as we grow, the challenges keep changing, but you have to adapt and survive.

    You have been resilient, and you have prospered through that. Keeping all that and working towards IP rights for more than 18 years now, what was the role of your engineering background in shaping the strategies that you particularly saw were different from regular lawyers? Obviously, there was a different understanding that came from having an engineering background plus a legal understanding. How have you seen that particular combination help you and your team grow and strategize at the same time?

    Yes, I have a different take on this. Whatever course or degree or exercise you take, it shapes your mind to think in a particular way. That’s what engineering does.

    Engineering doesn’t teach you anything specific. It trains your mind in a particular direction, to think a certain way, to solve issues or problems with a different bent of mind. Engineering teaches you to deconstruct a problem, break down the system into fundamental parts, look at each part individually, and then see their function and assimilate them.

    Law, on the other hand, teaches you to analyze. Law teaches you to connect those individual parts in a logical and legal framework. So, having training in both aspects helps you see the final picture without missing the finer details. That’s what the combination of engineering and law helps you achieve.

    Initially, I was more involved in patent prosecution. Over time, I was exposed to IP litigation, which has added a third dimension to my thinking. When you are prosecuting patents, your basic idea is to get a patent. When you go into litigation, you realize the basic idea is how to get a patent that is enforceable.

    It teaches you what holds in court and what falls apart. This practical insight sharpens my instincts in the entire scheme of things. Now I try to look for the best claim scope or how to draft better claims. As a litigator, I have realized that my ability to draft and interpret claims has also improved.

    Claims should be broad enough, assertable, and defendable even under attack. All those things shape your thinking. Every day is a learning process. Every case teaches you something. So whether I’m guiding someone, I’m not just focused on getting the examination and obtaining a patent, but also on how much I can contribute to obtaining an enforceable patent. My goal is to create IP that is not just strong on paper.

    It should withstand scrutiny. It should attract investors. It should survive litigation, both offensive and defensive, and it should support the business in market entry. Starting and setting up my business also helps me understand the key challenges any company faces with regard to IP protection.

    You don’t go all out and spend all your money on IP. Business is also important. It’s a combination and a learning that has helped me consult clients. I don’t work with clients as just a service provider or as a lawyer. I work hand in glove, even suggesting who they should go to for a merger or whom they should not partner with. I regularly undertake those kinds of activities.

    That’s why I like working with early-stage startups or small tech companies, because there you can be very closely invested. Over time, I’ve seen most of my clients trust me because we make them understand that IP isn’t just about legal protection. It’s a business asset.

    So technical understanding, legal foresight, and business acumen that’s why we have been successful as KAnalysis, I would say. I’ve seen my clients from their first provisional patent to securing multimillion-dollar funding. Those have been brilliant experiences.

    We would also love to understand that particular monetization process and the multimillion-dollar deals that you have done for IP monetization especially.

    But before that, we would love to ask you about your pro bono work also, where you have invested a lot of your time in initiatives like the IP Help Desk for startups and the IP workshops that you keep on doing. What actually fuels your dedication to promoting IP awareness and educating academicians and entrepreneurial communities related to this? Because you do it pro bono and you are also involved in a lot of deals which are for monetization. So how do you find the balance between these two, and how do you find time to do that?

    That’s interesting! I’ll tell you a very humorous anecdote. When I joined IP, it was very difficult to convince my dad what I was doing. And he is a professor. So that is the level of IP awareness in India. It took me a long while because India has no dearth of innovation, but IP awareness and awareness around IP rights remain uneven. Startups, academic institutions, and big companies have their setup because they have realized it the hard way.

    They have been sued or they want to protect, so they have mechanisms. But startups and academia lack IP awareness. Over the years, I have been working and managing one of the largest patent portfolios in India. We are managing portfolios in over 80 countries, spanning over 30,000 patents.

    So, handling that kind of a portfolio, I realized that most of my clients are from outside India. During COVID, you get time to ponder a lot about what we are doing and what we are giving back to society. During those days, I realized, let’s start an IP help desk to help startups, because startups are in the most gullible phase. I have seen investors who are real sharks take over their hard-earned innovation and everything. So I launched the IP help desk just to help them understand their questions, their issues, and guide them or handhold them without charging them. Because initially, they’re short on money and they think everybody is trying to sell something.

    I have done over 150 pro bono workshops across the country in the last two and a half years. These are not just lectures; they’re conversations where I help to demystify IP to the founders, to the people at incubation centers, those who have just started, and I give them practical, usable advice.

    How to stagger the cost. How you can protect yourself with minimum cost. So that when you attract investors, you may pay me but how can we get to that stage where you are attractive to the investor and protected. Because IP should not be an afterthought. It should be part of the innovation process from day one.

    Founders and researchers need to understand their rights and the value of protection. That’s what I do. I try to make them understand where the value lies. It’s not a cost center, it’s an asset. Slowly and gradually, I’m assisting over 1,000 startups at the moment, who are transforming in their trust in me, their confidence, and their outlook. For me, this is a way of giving back to the ecosystem, because ultimately this ecosystem has shaped me, and I ensure that the next generation has all the tools to compete globally. Because Indians should be competing globally. Big companies or multinationals will not build India. It will be the SME sector that writes the next India growth story.

    So that’s what my mission is to enable startups to lead the India story. Whatever little I can contribute, I try to contribute.

    That’s not little, that’s huge. One person can bring in so much change and can bring in so many people together to work towards one goal of making India again an IP hub as you have envisioned for everyone.

    Yeah, that’s why I keep my Fridays open for four hours. Anybody can book a slot and they can ask questions, without any charges. So that’s something that attracts most people.

    Wow! We would love to promote that aspect. And we’ll definitely talk about this the Fridays that you keep open for people to come to you and have that free consultation. That’s something which is not easily available, at least from such senior attorneys who are already managing such big portfolios.

    This is something that is very inspiring for young professionals also. So, sir, how would you like to talk about the intersection of science, innovation, and law, and what kind of core skills these young professionals can seek when they’re trying or thinking of building a career? And what do you propose to build that particular mindset, and what kind of advice would you like to give to them so that they can thrive in this particular field of intellectual property, keeping in mind that they also have to give back to society, as you already are doing?

    For anybody to give back to society, they should first focus on building their career and themselves. And they should enjoy IP, because this is a field where, if you don’t enjoy it, you cannot work a single day. That joy, that kick you don’t have to drag yourself to the office any day. You just look forward to it. And for that, the basics for students or young professionals is that you should develop interdisciplinary fluency.

    You should have a passion for science, an understanding of law, and an ability to look at business so that you are able to connect the dots. That’s something I always suggest. It’s not about mastering one thing. You have to be a jack of all trades. You have to be good at multiple things, because if you go in one direction if you are very good at law, IP is not for you. That’s the core legal side. If you’re good at engineering, IP is not for you either.

    You should have a flair for multiple things. That’s what IP requires. You should also cultivate a habit of deep listening, because the majority of my clients describe symptoms, not problems. My job is to diagnose both.

    They would just give me a situation where they’re stuck. That’s just a symptom. The real problem lies somewhere else. I need to identify what the root problem is and then provide a solution. Somebody has sued them filing a countersuit is not always the solution. There is also room for arbitration.

    If my case is not very strong, I would look for other avenues where I could bring the other party to the negotiating table. So that’s all part of business strategy. Secondly, I would advise the young generation to stay curious, because IP is evolving rapidly, especially with areas like AI, genomics, cleantech, and the majority of the new avenues that are coming.

    If you are not curious, if you are not rigorously reading, it’ll be very difficult to stay updated. This field needs you to be relevant. And finally, last but not the least be ethical. Cutting corners is not going to help you survive long in this field. This field is built on trust. So if you try to cut corners, you might get one or two clients, or you might get one or two cases, which would be shortcuts.

    But integrity will help you build a career. That’s a must. This field rewards only those who are sharp and sensitive. It’s not something you should be ruthless about. Those who can think like a scientist, act like a lawyer, and listen like a consultant. I always say to anybody who is hired that you should have good listening skills, but you should act like a lawyer and think like a scientist.

    That’s what an IP lawyer should be. It’s not a one-dimensional career, I would say. I have been actively mentoring our juniors to understand what I call IP fluency. It’s the ability to connect innovation, law, and commercial relevance. Because there is a brilliant invention that somebody has done, most of the inventors are very passionate about what they have created.

    But is it packaged enough to be marketable as a product? An IP lawyer would stop before that. I go that extra step. How would the market perceive this? What would be the best sales strategy? If you could associate your product with some bigger brand, how would this complement?

    So, those kinds of strategies I come up with because I try to help the business grow rather than just limiting myself to the IP side. So if you are someone who is curious, ethical, and eager to make an impact, IP is the career for you. It’s a very fulfilling career path. But choosing wisely is what I suggest.

    We also have one very good initiative in our organization where we have weekly training sessions for everybody. Whatever is there, they are given specific topics to present to the entire organization. Every fortnight, we have sessions so they get to dive deeper into that particular topic. That is something I have been doing regularly in this organization, because for me, it’s all about the culture that we build. We are here to nurture, and that’s what we have been doing.

    So I’ll start with “curiosity is the key, thinking like a scientist, acting like a lawyer.” Sir, keeping all that in mind, how have you developed this culture inside your organization and made sure that everyone is aligned with the whole process? Because it’s a huge organization.

    It’s in several jurisdictions as well. So the kind of thought process that’s involved also requires an understanding of having very good mental health as well as physical health. How have you worked on that and made sure that all your team members are not only aligned but also following the certain protocols that you may have set? Because it has become a very big and growing issue of mental health problems and compromised physical health and people have started talking about it. So how do you work around that and make sure that you also stay healthy and that your team across the globe is also equally healthy?

    It’s definitely a journey. I would say I’ve been trying hard to maintain a balance, but yes, it’s still a learning curve. I used to equate longer hours with better outcomes.

    That was earlier. Over time, I have realized or with experience, I could do things much quicker and I have realized that clear thinking, a strategic approach, and, I would say, strong leadership all combine to form a structure that helps you remain fit. By fit, I mean mental health more, because lawyers get involved in a case so much that they’re not able to shut down when they’re not working.

    Even in the subconscious mind, a case keeps on going. When you are so involved, a setback in court would ruin your evening, which shouldn’t be.

    So a lot of times it happens, but now I take time and ensure that I switch off. I listen to music, go for walks, or the best I like is speaking to young professionals that helps me unwind.

    And I have a supporting family. I have a very close group of friends. I have kids who help me relax, and that’s how I keep my mental balance. I would say they help me recharge, especially when things get intense and it happens almost every week. So that’s how it is.

    Delegation of work and another important point that I forgot worth mentioning, is building a strong second line. Because as the firm grows, you need to have a second line that takes care of the majority of my issues so that I come into the picture at a very later stage.

    That helps me go out and work daily because prioritizing mental health is not just about myself, but it’s all across the firm. Because if you are not sustainable, it’ll not last long. You’ll burn out.

    So we need to keep that flame alive but that flame should not burn you is what I always tell people. You stay motivated, but at least learn to enjoy, and that enjoyment should come.

    I’m very fortunate to have a set of friends who keep me grounded. They don’t let me fly too long. So that’s how I relax and unwind. And I’m still learning. Scaling means having trust in your second line, having trust in your delegation, having trust in your processes and culture. I’m very thankful that I have built a very good team. It’s a slow and steady process.

    Every hiring goes through a lot of vetting.

    I’m personally involved in most of the hirings that happen in the company because the culture should be intact. The mindset you can teach a person but you can’t change the attitude. So that is one thing I always, always look for in people. Somebody who has not played any sport would not be a good team player, is what I feel.

    So these are small, small things that I keep in mind when I look for people while hiring. I like to speak to them for an hour or so to understand and pick up some things from their mind. That person might be a brilliant asset, but if it’s not a fit for the culture, then he’s not the person for me.

    Amazing views, sir. Thank you so much for talking about building a very strong second line as well as delegating your work obviously with diligence and with the understanding that it’ll work after you have delegated.

    Sir, while you were talking about IP rights and IP management and other aspects of intellectual property, you also talked about negotiations and management. We would like to ask you your thoughts about the arbitrations that keep happening in intellectual property. How do you see the future of IP arbitration in India and globally as well? Because you have a global presence.

    I have been involved in several IP transactions as well, and over time I realized that your biggest competitors could be your potential collaborators in the future. This is a big jigsaw puzzle. Every piece needs to fit in somewhere, and that is something where there is always room for negotiation, because nobody is outrightly against anybody.

    It’s that everybody is protecting their own business interests. So in the broader sense, what we do is we try, as I mentioned earlier, to deconstruct the dispute. What is the major negotiating point? What is a strict no-go?

    Is there any chance where a financial negotiation could also take place?

    Because initially, I was also involved in a lot of IP valuation work as well. So, if there is a dollar value attributed to this particular piece of technology, could there be a royalty scope wherein we could have a negotiation around that?

    Arbitration is not always about having a mandatory step, because these days, courts have been constantly pushing for arbitration, and people should first try out arbitration before starting the trial.

    But arbitration as a first step needs to be taken care of. The real challenge I feel in India is that there are not enough trained arbitrators. Arbitration is a very, very specialized niche that is going to be very lucrative. There is very little expertise in that particular domain.

    Because an arbitrator who specializes in aerospace would not be a good fit for e-commerce.

    So for somebody who is a domain-specific arbitrator it has been a wonderful experience working with some very good arbitrators trained in Singapore or Dubai.

    Because those two centers I really like the framework they have: the training of arbitrators, the certification courses they offer.

    It’s amazing. I have had the fortune of working with quite a few of them, and I wish India had that kind of setup, where we have training schools for arbitrators where there is a specific coursework, six months or eight months, wherein arbitrators are trained to arbitrate. Because most of the time, we have our own biases, and arbitrators shouldn’t be biased.

    So those are small, small things that arbitrators need to inculcate. With training and proper guidance from established institutes across the globe, India can be a major hub because that would lead to a reduction in a lot of the backlog we have in courts, if there is a good arbitration mechanism.

    In IP, I would say it’s very laughable that most of the businesses 500, 600 crore businesses were started by a family. When they split, they don’t have a proper agreement about IPR or brands, and that fight goes on.

    Those family businesses I’ve been involved in a lot of feuds in family businesses where the brand, who owns the brand later, is a real nightmare, because many people don’t understand the value of the brand unless they see that they can’t sell using that brand. Then the valuation starts.

    So it’s still in a very, very nascent stage in India.

    But I am very hopeful that the next crop would be more accustomed to and more inclined towards alternate dispute resolution mechanisms.

    Sir, with the kind of experience and exposure you’re offering through your workshops, I truly hope many others follow your lead so that India can become the IP hub you’ve envisioned. As we come to the end of this conversation, I’d love to understand how you keep yourself updated with everything happening in the IP world. How much do you read, how often do you interact with the international community, and what differences have you observed in the understanding of IP rights across jurisdictions? Since you’ve worked in over 80 jurisdictions, you must have encountered varied approaches to the same IP concepts. It would be great if you could share those insights for the benefit of young professionals.

    Definitely. Because IP is a global thing. It’s not restrained. You need protection in multiple countries, but each country has a different law that we should understand. Each country has a different patentability criterion.

    Some things are patentable here, some things are not patentable here. Method patents are patentable in some countries, some countries only allow system claims. So this kind of thing, where you are seeking global protection if you don’t have a bird’s eye view of different jurisdictions that are patentable in Japan might not be patentable here in India. Or let’s say there is a business method patent, which is allowed in the US but not allowed in India. Software patents we face a lot of issues regarding Section 3D or repurposing of drugs. So all those things you need to work with attorneys across multiple jurisdictions to understand.

    If you are starting with a PCT application, my team has been trained with US attorneys, European attorneys, Canadian attorneys, even Japanese and Chinese attorneys. So when we write a PCT, you have room to amend in that specific jurisdiction when you enter that.

    When you are trying to prosecute applications across the globe if you are working here most people would go and help you to submit with a foreign attorney without giving you the legal perspective. Let’s say if you file in the US with 20 claims.

    Same application if you go to Europe why go with 20 claims if you have to pay an additional claim fee for five extra claims? Because above 15, Europe charges. In China, it charges above 10. Some people I have encountered in the past it’s against my profession but I would say that just to justify the billing of $20,000, they write a 200-page patent.

    That invention was brilliant and beautiful, and it should have been protected across the globe. But the translation cost was so high that the client could not afford to file in non-English jurisdictions. Only nine or ten countries allow you to file in English. The rest all require local language. You get the translation done.

    Why write a textbook when you are writing a patent? Be concise, be compliant, and think about the business of the client rather than your billing is what I always suggest. So having a global perspective with regard to global filings has been the hallmark of our success because our patents get prosecuted in multiple jurisdictions, and we are the ones who are responsible for all the jurisdictions.

    We would not say that we have drafted as per Indian law and the rest you take care of with your local attorneys. Then you keep on having office action after office action after office action, and you end up spending a lot without getting the patent because it was written in such a manner that there is very little room to go ahead.

    I’ll tell you, these days I’m facing a lot of issues with Indian companies, I would say. They cut corners while drafting a patent. They come to us for making a response for a US office action. After our response, the claims are allowed, but the final objection comes that there is no support for those claims in the specification.

    You can amend the claims, but you can’t amend the specification. A brilliant innovation goes down the drain because you have already disclosed most of the things. There are remedies that we suggest, but you end up having your cost at least 1.5 to 1.8 times. You try to save a few dollars and you end up spending a fortune. So that’s something that needs to be told to the people and to the business community that it’s always a penny-wise and pound-foolish situation.

    That is the kind of situation that most Indian businesses are facing these days.

    And as you mentioned at the start, they don’t want to pay. They will pay. They’ll pay when they are in a soup. Why get in a soup? Have preventive strategies first. That’s my advice.

    Why get into a suing battle later when paying upfront can keep you protected for life? I’d really like to understand your thoughts and motivation. How do you envision the IP hub idea becoming a reality in India over the next decade, especially considering the high-profile cases you’ve handled and the challenges you’ve seen businesses face? Since you’re mentoring so many attorneys, startups, and businesses, what would your advice or strategy be to help make this vision real, especially with the government also actively working towards IP awareness? How can both young professionals and seasoned attorneys contribute to this goal?

    I would say that we need to shift our mindset from domestic-first to a global situation. It should be global by design. Most of the people file PCT applications, and I have seen people who say that they have got a worldwide patent.

    So that’s the level of awareness they have. And they don’t enter the national phase, and everything goes down the drain.

    So if you start with a global perspective, then only you’ll be able to compete globally. That’s why KAnalysis started. We came up with the idea everybody laughed at us that how can you manage through a single window so many jurisdictions?

    Step by step, step by step, the team got trained. We got trained in understanding different countries, different jurisdictions, what kind of objections each country has. We have built strategies where you could save at least 40% of your cost if you plan your prosecution and global IP filing strategically. Minimum 40% saving that we have shown repeatedly again and again.

    That’s a huge amount of money considering you are looking at 8 to 10 jurisdictions to file. Of course, India has made commendable strides. It’s not that India has not done anything. At that time, there was no digital filing when I started. Now it’s all digital.

    Expedited examination is a very welcome step that we have. They have increased outreach programs, which is very good. They have stakeholders’ meetings that is a very welcome step.

    The major problem that I see is inconsistency in the examination of patents. Delay has been something that I have always been seeing, but now at least with expedited examinations and all, I’ve been able to get patents within a year, many times.

    So those are some things that have certainly helped. Just like USPTO, the Indian Patent Office needs to adapt to AI for basic things. You can’t replace humans, but at least the formalities checks and all those things could be automated. USPTO has automated all those things.

    That would help us get a better outcome, faster outcome, and reduce the delay in enforcement.

    I empathize with the judiciary because they have a huge backlog, but the Indian system legal reform is the need of the hour. If you want to be business-friendly, you need to have fast-track courts. IP divisions here in two high courts is a very welcome step. It’s really, really helpful. But we need to have more dedicated IP courts across the country.

    IP should be the prime focus of the country. Because if you want to become a so-called Vishwa Guru, then you need to focus on IP. If you don’t do that, you’ll not be a business-friendly jurisdiction. You’ll just be a center for cheap labor, and your manufacturing will move somewhere else because they will be cheaper than you.

    Unless you innovate, unless you try to remain attractive to innovation, unless you create an ecosystem for innovation you’ll just remain like that.

    We have seen examples. Malaysia was one such country which could not innovate. It rose very fast, and then stagnated and phased out. They were calling it the next bright spot.

    Innovation sustains. The US hardly makes anything. They innovate. So innovation needs to be nurtured.

    And at the very grassroots levels, school curriculum should have at least a course on IPR. I tell my kids a very fascinating story. They were making some paintings at home, so I told them to always sign your painting.

    Otherwise, somebody else would take the credit. That’s IPR.

    So that’s something we need to inculcate and create right from the initial days that anything you create, it’s your intellectual property.

    And think beyond. And our education system also needs an overhaul where we have relevant courses that are more aligned with industry requirements.

    That is something I look forward to with this government. Let’s see how much they do.

     Thank you, sir, for being here and for your incredible dedication to intellectual property. It’s rare to see someone live and breathe IP the way you do. We truly appreciate you taking the time to share your insights on IP rights, monetization, valuation, and so much more. Your passion is inspiring, and we hope it drives India closer to becoming a global IP hub.

    One thing I would like to add in the end.

    We should learn to celebrate innovators like we celebrate a lot of things.

    We should have a national program to celebrate innovators. That would be really an encouraging sign for anybody to innovate.

    Get in touch with Nilanshu Shekhar –

  • Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

    Bridging Borders: Making Law Accessible for Startups Worldwide – Priyanka Mandhani, Corporate lawyer, Company Secretary and Founder of Juris Summit.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    I will start backwards. I’ll not start with the very first question, why you chose law, but I would request you to answer first why and when you decided to start Juris Summit, what was the reason that you started it so soon? What are your plans? How are you going to work on the cross border business laws, and what do you see and where do you see yourself and Juris Summit in next, let’s say five years and a decade?

    I’m so thankful and grateful for all of the SuperLawyer team for bringing this opportunity to me. And yes, I’m looking forward to collaborating with you people and also to giving guidance to all the newcomers who are wishing and willing to start their career on an international platform.

    So, yeah, you know, there are some things, like we said, we get it out of WhatsApp chat.

    So me and my partner Sohan, we met in a WhatsApp group, like in a freelancer group, and at that time, back after two years, we had started our individual freelancing journey. So, we individually found that startups, they struggle, particularly startups, they struggle a lot because there are two things.

    First thing is, particularly I’m talking about the US startups. The United States law firms charge a lot. I would say 800 dollars per hour, and even beyond that. So I was like, what is this? Why are they charging this much?

    Of course, they provide services and they do everything that needs to be done, but we also are authorized to do that, and we can also do it at a lesser price. So that was the first point. And the second point, startups, they want everything fast. They approach any lawyer or somewhere that gives us a template, we will do it ourselves. And in that template, the alignment of business, the clauses, they’re not properly as per their business. They’re not aligned with their business.

    So these are the two things which I felt that I needed to bridge a gap between this thing. So at that time, I had a talk with Sohan. Sohan, this is the problem, we need to fill it out. So he said, so let’s go, let’s build an agency. Then let’s work together.

    And I said, yeah, let’s do it. Why not? And then without a second thought, it was just like bam! Out of a WhatsApp chat. We set up an agency.

    Amazing journey. Amazing start. So let’s now get back to the basics. How did you become convinced that you have to do law as well as company secretaryship?

    And with this kind of dual qualification, how did you pave your way towards not only being an Indian lawyer, but also a lawyer who’s internationally acclaimed and who has moved to Germany and is working from there?

    So, the thing is, I wanted to become a chartered accountant firstly, so I started my journey back then. I’ve cleared my CPT, and after that I could not understand what was happening, but suddenly in that period of time, my interest was very much into law. Then I thought of the professional course of company secretary, and without second thought, again, I enrolled myself into company secretary and successfully I’ve completed everything in the first attempt. And side by side, as this is a law field, I also enrolled myself for an LLB course, a three years course. So I’ve also completed my LLB, and fortunately in the last year of LLB I topped the university, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University.

    So, this is how I wanted to prepare myself fully, and after all these things were done, still I felt like something was missing. Then I found courses like US corporate laws, then diploma in international business laws.

    And that thing fascinated me. I said I want to do this. I want to set up a remote practice for myself. I wanted to do this thing. So without a second thought, I enrolled myself. And today I’m here so that I can work from Germany with US law firms, and not only US, all over the world, I can work with every country’s client.

    So, with all these things, which you decide on a first go, what kind of experience do you have of the transition that you have done from traditional legal practice to starting, founding and running a specialized legal agency, which is right now catering mostly to international clients, particularly in US, like you already have explained about startups. How is your experience about the agency and how does it work for you and your partner and the kind of challenges that you see in having Indian laws, having international laws and their comparison? How does that work for you?

    I would start with the traditional law firms in India or wherever we can say. So, at the law firm I had access to a predictable environment, and consistent staff support was there. Then we had a particular library where we can read and where we can update ourselves. But mostly there were domestic clients, and there were Indian timelines, as you must be aware of, then billing expectations. And so all these things were somewhere I feel they’re keeping me down, they’re setting up boundaries for me.

    So, when I started a legal agency, these were not the things. There were, obviously, challenges because time zone and communication are the biggest challenges when we start an agency that is hundred percent remote and which deals with international clients.

    So, we have staff, obviously we have staff, and what we do is someone between us is always awake at US time zone so that we can grab all the opportunities, so that we can reply to all the clients. And even if he’s not there, what do we do, because we use technology, right?

    We have to use technology. We set auto replies to that particular person. In that way, we don’t push the client, we can’t talk right now, and it’s not our time zone. This is how we work.

    So even if there is any urgent matter or something  because we see clients that want something within 24 hours, within a few hours we actually do that. We don’t say we can’t do this. This is not a timeline to deliver everything, nothing like that. We’ll do everything.

    Someone from us will have to do that. And we have set our agency like that only. So these are the challenges: timeline and communication.

    So, talking about communication, recently we had a client from Saudi Arabia, and I personally had to deal with him.

    So, the first time I didn’t understand what he’s talking about, his accent was so difficult to understand. But thanks to the notes we take, whenever we start a meeting, on the other end we start taking notes. So thanks to all these things, thanks to technology, we understand these things.

    So these are the challenges we overcome, and that’s how it works.

     This shows that the kind of work that you are doing is getting more and more  reach, and that is something which is the value addition to your work at Juris Summit.  So the kind of driving force that you, your partners and the people who work with you have, what kind of gaps or insufficiencies or legal issues you have seen in US business laws as compared to Indian business laws? And the kind of observation that has helped you overcome those challenges and help US companies or businesses have their legal work done with you.

    Okay, so, I mentioned this before, that for billing, the US firms charge a lot. So this is the first thing that we wanted to fill the gap  to provide services at a lower price than the US law firms.

    The second thing, obviously, about the DIY route you know, templates from online platforms and Reddit forums they get. So these are the gaps Juris Summit set out to fill. We offer a third party responsive, startup-savvy legal support delivered by us. Like we are experienced, we have an experienced team and at a cost that makes sense for early-stage companies.

    I’m talking particularly here about the early stage because businesses which are already set, normally, they don’t hesitate or they don’t struggle this much. So, we focus on flat fees. Not an hourly basis. There’s no surprising billings and nothing like that. Scope-defined engagements and what we call it legal sprints.

    So, founders know exactly what they are paying for. So for example, what if there is a review document with us, we have to review that document, we make sure we provide another document  that we just don’t review it and tell him that these are the findings and these are the loopholes that we need to fill.

    And these are the liability clauses and everything. Not like that. What we suggest from the very first clause, to try to make him understand in a simple language. We make a document and we write it in a simple language, clause to clause, that you should know what you are signing. So this is our approach  to make him understand everything.

    We speak their language in short, I can say we speak their language. We don’t just recite, deliver code or GDPR clauses, we explain what it means for their product, their fundraising, or any contractor agreement. So this is how we work.

    And Juris Summit is all about delivering clarity, speed, strategy at the point where founders need it most. We don’t just drop documents, we help build legally sound businesses one decision at a time. And that’s the gap we saw and the reason we are here.

     So on that note, how do you guys keep yourself updated with the new changes in laws in different jurisdictions. Not only the US, like you just now said that you dealt with a client from Saudi Arabia, then other jurisdictions also. So what is your way of keeping yourself updated and keeping your team updated as well?

     So, what happens is normally when we start our day, normally, we start our day at 9:00 AM. 

    So for the first half hour, particularly of mine, I look for all the US jurisdictions, the updates and everything.  There are many newsletters which I have subscribed to.  Then I also have many attorneys. Like we have a group with US attorneys to get the updates. Hey, what’s going on? What’s new? We talk normally like that. So  I get updates from them. And on the other hand, Sohan, he handles Indian jurisdiction, all the Indian and Asian. So basically our first hour or half an hour is only to update ourselves with all the knowledge.

    And apart from this, what we do is set a meeting every 15 days or weekly, biweekly. And, we exchange each other’s knowledge. Hey, what’s new? What did you see? What did you see in the last 15 days? Please share with us what’s up? And everything is online, so we keep a very friendly manner, very relaxed atmosphere, everyone shares his or her thoughts. So like that we exchange our thoughts and we keep updated.

     Are there any specific reading materials or any channel which you especially look out for? Because there are so many of them. If you could name a few, it would be very helpful for the learners as well.

    There are many channels, newsletters. See, it depends upon the learner, how they find it, how easy it is to get the knowledge from that particular newsletter or particular journal or everything.

    So it depends upon the learner, there are many. If you Google it, you will find it. And there are many AIs. Research tools or even if you go to LexisNexis or Westlaw websites. These are the websites where you get all the knowledge.

    Even if you type, what’s the update here tonight? If you even Google it, you’ll get an idea. You will get a list thoroughly. So not a particular channel or anything I follow, but it depends upon, what exactly I want to see on that particular day, that’s how I Google it. And there are a number of websites and journals and everything.

     So let’s move ahead and understand how you help the startups and SMEs, especially those that are led by non-US founders,  but they are being navigated by US federal laws or state laws. How do you make sure that you explain those things, especially tax compliance and other overwhelming aspects of law to your client and make sure that it has been taken care while you help their startup being established in us from scratch until the time they need your help.

     Yeah, as you mentioned that US Federal and tax compliance may be overwhelming and to simplify this is our job, so we simplify US federal and state tax compliances for non-US founders by removing the overwhelm and breaking everything into clear and actionable steps. So for example, we begin with a founder friendly roadmap.  We draft a simple PDF, a simple agreement or like an information document and that outlines all the key tax obligations across federal or state levels.  So this includes important filings like the EIN, then form 5472 then franchise tax and sales tax registration with its timeline and responsible parties that is clearly indicated in that particular document. So since we don’t use a client portal, we ensure accessibility and clarity by sharing checklists and guides over email and tools like Google Drive, we use that. So, you know, founders can track their progress step by step.

     We provide all necessary templates where it’s 83 B, election letter or a sales tax exemption certificate with instruction return in plain English. This is how we manage it. And for ongoing compliances as well, we partner with experienced CPAs.

    Like we have many CPAs in our touch and bookkeepers who specialize in cross-border entities. So this is how we provide all the information to them.  And once introduced, we stay in loop to ensure filings are accurate, then deadlines are met. And the startup stays in solid ground.

    So, as I mentioned earlier, our goal is very simple. Remove all the complexities, bring structure to compliances and let non-US founders focus on building and remove that overwhelmingness.

    How do you manage your physical and mental health while you are doing all of this in different timelines?

    Because obviously sitting in one timeline and working. But managing different timelines, having that presence all the time, that all 24 hours we are available for clients. How do you manage that particular aspect of your life where you have to take care of your physical health as well as your mental health?

    Yeah, start your day with meditation. And hitting a gym, that thing keeps me going all day because, as you have also already mentioned, I have to keep aligned with every time zone and everything. So obviously, this is hectic, this is not easy. But if you manage things properly, it’s all about time management.

    We can’t say we don’t have time, we can’t say that. We have to manage the time, and then we’ll have time automatically. And for my mental health, I walk a lot. It gives me clarity when I walk. It clears my mind. Take a walk in nature for, let’s say, 15 to 20, even 20 minutes, just one round or something.

    It’ll help you boost your thinking and give clarity on what you are doing. And after every two hours, take a break of 10 minutes. It’ll boost your productivity, we would say. So we have to manage. I don’t say no to anything.

    I say I can do it. So there is nothing that you can’t do, I feel. You have to do it. If you decide, there will be a way. You will have to find a way and you can do it.

     You can do everything with an amazing understanding and the way you are doing it, may you have all the success that you have planned for yourself. It’s an amazing experience to understand how you have gone so far, just by the sheer willpower of being able to do anything and everything under the sun.

     It’s an overwhelming thought as well that you carry forward yourself with the thought of being able to do it.

     One more thing. It’s not easy to keep motivated and to stay positive all the time. Because there were times in my life as well where  I started this freelancing journey, there were times where I didn’t get clients. I had to struggle. But the thing is we have to keep going without giving up.

    This is the mantra. Don’t give up. Stand back. There will be your time.  You can’t give up. That’s it. You can’t give up. You have to keep putting in the hard work.

    Get in touch with Priyanka Mandhani –

  • Leading with Curiosity: My Journey with Law, Tech, and Mentorship. – Astha Srivastava, Principal Associate at Ikigai Law.

    Leading with Curiosity: My Journey with Law, Tech, and Mentorship. – Astha Srivastava, Principal Associate at Ikigai Law.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    With over nine years of experience, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? What drove your decision to choose this profession, and how did your journey shape you into a mentor and a leading voice in technology law?

    It’s always nice to be asked this question. It gives you an opportunity to pause and reflect. And when I do that, I’m taken back to the time I seriously started thinking about law – probably around Class 8 or 9.

    I knew I enjoyed public speaking. I loved talking to people, reading, analysing things, and connecting the dots. Law felt like a natural extension of these abilities.

    That was also around the time when internet use was just picking up in India. I remember, sometime in Class 10 or 11, my father got us a desktop computer. I used it to look up what CLAT was, what law school meant, and what this profession was all about.

    I also had a clear sense of what I wasn’t great at – I was average at maths. And I remember thinking: if I became an engineer, I’d probably be an average one. I didn’t want that. So I chose law. And looking back, I think that was absolutely the right call.

    I didn’t overthink whether I’d succeed or not. At that point, I just knew I’d enjoy it. And that was enough.

    Once college started, I found myself drawn to finance pretty early on. That’s what pulled me toward corporate law firms. I began with transactions—PE/VC, mergers and acquisitions. I spent four years doing that at JSA. But I gradually realised that advisory work really resonated with me.

    As I moved from JSA to IndiGo, I became more and more certain that the intersection of finance and tech was where I wanted to be. And that brought me to Ikigai Law.

    It’s been five years since. And honestly, most days, I’m genuinely excited to go to work. I think that’s rare and I’m grateful for it.

    Basically, if you love what you do, you don’t really work, you just do it.

    Well, you still work. It’s still hard. That said, there are definitely parts you enjoy. There’s intellectual satisfaction, a sense of recognition, and those moments of achievement that keep you going. Over time, you also start to see a bigger purpose. Whether it’s mentoring others, hopefully inspiring them in some small way or doing something else for the society based on what you have built. All of that becomes a motivator. You learn something new every day. And most days, you walk away feeling good.

    We all have our own challenges to navigate, and when it comes to FinTech, especially disruptive tech like blockchain, it becomes even more complex. Since blockchain sits at the intersection of technology, finance, and law, we’d love to hear your views on how companies are planning for this shift and how you tailor your consulting approach. As someone deeply involved on the corporate side, how have you adapted to these evolving technologies? What challenges have you faced, and how are companies responding to them? For instance, how do you navigate legal ambiguities around cryptocurrency, which isn’t legal tender but is still taxable?

    It’s a very interesting question. I do work a lot in the Web 3.0 space, along with traditional domains like lending, payments, and Wealth-Tech. The interesting part about being a blockchain lawyer is that it allows you to do the same thing but in a completely different plane. It’s like being transported to another universe where you’re doing the same things, paying, investing, lending, but in a blockchain-based world.

    Right now, there are very limited laws in select jurisdictions that apply to such technologies. The exciting part of being a lawyer here is that you apply traditional laws, for instance, those regulating cross-border money flow, like RBI’s foreign exchange regulations or the PSS Act, to this entirely new world. The best part is that nobody has done this before. There are hardly any judicial precedents. So your thought process is as original as it gets.

    As lawyers, we rarely get the chance to be that original. And naturally, a corollary to advising clients on emerging tech is that you get pulled into policy-making. So you get to do exciting work that I don’t think the previous generation of lawyers got to do. 

    But the hard part is, you have to really think originally. You have to know how the law applies in the traditional world. You need experience. Take, for instance, something like the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. You can pull out provisions from it and apply them to blockchain. Or the Collective Investment Scheme, something SEBI has been regulating since 1999. You might apply those same rules when advising a blockchain-based product emulating that scheme.

    So yes, it’s exciting, it’s hard, but it’s the right time to be in this space.

    You’re helping shape the future for generations of lawyers, and that’s a powerful responsibility. With your experience in suggestive work and public policy at Ikigai, could you share key learnings from that journey and how they’ve impacted your practice? Having transitioned from finance and law to technology, then an in-house role, and now back to private practice, how do you think these shifts will influence your career? How can young lawyers chart their own unique paths by learning from your journey?

    In medical practice, unless you understand the human body, you can’t be a heart specialist. Similarly, in law, unless you understand the building blocks, you can’t specialize meaningfully.

    So, for early practitioners, I’d say focus on the basics, reading the law, comprehension, analytical ability, and issue spotting. These only come when you’ve been exposed to a wide variety of laws, from IBC to RERA to the Motor Vehicles Act. The downside of specializing too early is that you miss that exposure. 

    The focus should be on building solid foundational skills, communicating well, writing clearly. Once that’s in place, you can specialize. Then you can apply those general skills to any sector, FinTech, SpaceTech, AgriTech. But if the basics aren’t strong, even in your chosen sector, things won’t work out.

    So in sum, get the basics right. Then go with the flow.

    The future in TMT space is definitely promising. I’m especially excited about AI, which is changing everything around us. And as lawyers, we play an important role. Who help sets the rules for this new world? We do.

    We need more talented lawyers. We need thinkers. Not just people who can read the law, but people who can think about it. If you’re in law school or the early stages of your career, focus on that.

    Wow! What a beautiful way of sharing your learning, it’s truly amazing. You’ve worked extensively as a principal associate advising FinTech startups within the Indian legal and regulatory framework. How do you see these startups overcoming jurisdictional obstacles, and what advice do you give them to navigate the Indian system? Do you notice significant differences between national and international regulatory approaches, and how do these impact startup success or failure globally?

    That’s a good question. I think we, as a country, are doing well. Because see, UPI is a great success. The other parts of our digital public infrastructure, like account aggregator frameworks, which are ramping up, are all Government-owned and Government-promoted.

    So the Government is doing its bit. Regulators are also, I think, trying really hard. For example, for the financial sector, RBI as a regulator not only looks after financial regulations but is also the monetary policymaker. So it has too much to do, but I think despite that, it has done a fair job.

    Also, our industry is vocal enough to fight for its cause. We have the right kind of supporters for the industry, the right kind of advisors for the industry, and the regulator is listening. It’s not like the doors are closed. Regulators also understand the importance of having that dialogue with the industry because the time has passed when you can do law-making in silos.

    So I think we are doing okay as a country. I’m not too concerned about the future. Now when I compare it to other jurisdictions, well, I would say that some practices are good in every jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions are more forward-looking in their approach. And India can borrow and learn from them.

    Thank you so much for being absolutely clear about how the government has supported FinTech growth while also acknowledging its fallbacks. You’ve worked extensively in this space, but transitioning from traditional legal work to technology and law isn’t easy. You’ve mentioned COVID played a role, but what effort did that shift actually take? How did you successfully manage this transition and excel in a new domain?

    Switching practice areas can be one of the hardest things to do. So I’ll take a step back and talk about why I made the switch.

    I started my career, as I mentioned earlier, with a general corporate practice. I had the privilege of working with some of the most brilliant lawyers in the country at JSA, which was incredibly motivating.

    While at JSA’s Gurgaon office, I got the opportunity to go on secondment with PepsiCo. At the time, PepsiCo was transferring all its major plants in India to Varun Beverages Limited – a massive business transfer. And being part of that was exhilarating. For the first time, I experienced what it means to run a business and impact of my advice on it. I was interacting with the communications team, the supply chain folks, plant managers – essentially everyone. My job was to orchestrate and help bring this entire transaction to a close. That experience made me seriously consider going in-house – it just seemed exciting and so much more connected to the business. That’s what led me to join IndiGo after four years at JSA.

    IndiGo was just as exciting as I had imagined. I was working on aircraft leases, technology contracts, software that went into aircraft systems. That was my first hands-on experience of how law interacts with technology. And that really piqued my interest in tech. I felt like it was something I could understand and contribute to.

    Then the pandemic hit. Around that time, I was already in touch with Ikigai, and stars just aligned. 

    So, some of the transition happened organically, some of it was by design and I think that’s how most careers unfold.

    If I had to leave you with two takeaways from this journey, they’d be these:

    First, don’t shy away from change and follow your instinct. Second, when an opportunity presents itself, grab it with both hands. Because chances are, it may not come again.

    What a candid way of explaining things, where you had to put in that hard work, and you did. Congratulations to you for making that seemingly impossible transition from one aspect of law to another and making it big. On that particular note, we would request you to share some personal checklists or personal ways of dealing with these kinds of transitions because such broad area transitions are not easy, and many people are unable to do them.

    What kind of suggestions do you have for these young lawyers who may start with one area but eventually want to transition? How do you do it, and how can one do it as smoothly as you have, without experiencing that stress of moving from one area to another while fearing the loss of something? Since you’ve done it, you’ll be the right person to suggest this to students and learners.

    In addition to what I’ve already said, I’ve just one thing to add. In my experience, anyone going through a good law school, who has joined a good law firm or is working with sharp lawyers is smart and intelligent. That’s why they are where they are. So that is table stakes. What really makes a real difference is persistence, patience and resilience.

    So, by the kind of understanding you’ve given us, resilience is absolutely important. Along with that, overcoming challenges is another key aspect. All of this you manage within the same 24 hours we all have. How do you maintain your mental, physical, professional, and personal health while juggling so much? What strategies do you follow, basic or advanced, to keep your sanity intact? As lawyers, we don’t talk enough about the stress we go through, whether in-house, in practice, or elsewhere. So how do you deal with it?

    That’s one question I get asked a lot. And honestly, there’s no simple answer. Like most young professionals, work-life balance wasn’t really a priority for me early in my career. There was no fixed schedule – you worked as per the demands of your clients. And I think that’s okay. You’re younger, your energy levels are different, and if you start chasing balance too early, you may find yourself struggling for relevance later. I read that somewhere, and it really stuck with me.

    Though, as I’ve grown older, I’ve found different ways to balance my life. And let me just say – I completely disagree with the idea that stress is something you should just get used to or live with because ‘it’s inevitable’. It’s not. Stress management, like lawyering or contract drafting, is a skill. And like any other skill, it can be learned.

    You have to self-train. You have to find the right mentors, speak to the right people, and actively work towards it. I’ve done a lot of that over the years.

    You also need a strong support system – people who are emotionally present and available for you. My family has been incredible, and I owe them everything. But friends matter just as much – both within and outside the profession. That’s been a huge source of strength for me. And most importantly, my husband is my biggest cheerleader and support system. Having that makes all the difference. Without it, it’s hard.

    Another big learning has been understanding the link between stress and physical health. Over the last four or five years, I’ve realised it’s not just a mindset issue – your physical health plays a huge role. And I know this might sound like standard social media advice, but it’s true: you need to move your body. You need to eat and sleep well. That’s what made a real difference for me. In fact, staying fit has now become one of my core interests.

    The third piece is having interests outside of work. That’s so important. We actively encourage this at Ikigai. 

    And finally, reading good books has helped. There’s so much you can self-learn today. As a generation, we’re incredibly lucky to have access to so much information. If we’re intentional about how we use it, we can teach ourselves almost anything.

    Thank you so much for your beautiful answers. Just to quickly respond to one of the aspects you mentioned, yes, we are our own leaders, and while we agree we should take command and understand things, it’s not always that easy. Sometimes organizations are supportive, sometimes they’re not. What we take away from this conversation is the importance of understanding what you’re doing, how you’re working, and who you’re working for. If you’re in the right environment, you’ll not only thrive professionally but also personally.

    I just wanted to share a few closing thoughts. I completely agree that the environment you work in, especially early in your career, can make all the difference.

    I also want to take a moment to talk about what we’re building at Ikigai. At the senior and mid-management level, we’re very intentional about creating a space that gives even our younger associates a lot of independence. There’s a strong emphasis on thinking independently, and we’re a flat and non-hierarchical setup. You can speak directly with the equity partners, the founding partner, with me, or with anyone else on the team.

    In many ways, we function like a new-age startup. Just like many of the clients we advise. And that’s something I’m genuinely proud of. 

    One of the most meaningful aspects of our culture, and something I hope more organizations adopt, is our deep focus on training and mentorship. It’s actually what drew me to Ikigai as a new lawyer. And now that I get to mentor others, it’s incredibly fulfilling. Personally, one of the ways I measure my own success is by how well I support and guide the associates and senior associates I work with.

    My hope is that this approach becomes the norm across the industry. I’m excited about what that future could look like.

    Get in touch with Astha Srivastava –

  • Law, Leadership, and Business: Becoming someone that clients trust. – Aditya Singha, Independent Commercial and Transaction Lawyer.

    Law, Leadership, and Business: Becoming someone that clients trust. – Aditya Singha, Independent Commercial and Transaction Lawyer.

    This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

    I’ll start with a very, very prominent question: how did you decide to become a lawyer, and then how did you decide to pursue an MBA as well? And that too, by scoring a staggering GMAT score of 740. Please enlighten our learners and us as well.

    So, I’ll be very honest, I never even dreamt of doing an MBA when I was setting out to become a lawyer. But luckily for me, I was born in a family where my grandfather was a lawyer, and that too, he wasn’t a lawyer throughout his career. He became a lawyer after he retired from government services. He was a civil lawyer. You would imagine that a lawyer who would take care of disputes, of people who would take care of disputes for companies, would have a lot of people coming into the house.

    So, very early on, from my childhood days, I would see people come to him for advice and assistance, even people who used to stay near our society. I would always see them come with a sense of hope and a sense of gratitude when they would leave, and that feeling, that there’s one person who could give people that hope, that guidance and that comfort that they need at a time which is probably very traumatic or very difficult for them, was something that I took very closely. So, I wanted to become a lawyer from a very early age.

    Secondly, I also enjoyed reading a lot, so that went in my favor because I realized that a lawyer’s job is to constantly update his or her knowledge, constantly keep on reading, and I enjoyed reading. So I felt, okay, this is another avenue where I think I can enhance those aspects about me because I also love to read and I love to learn more.

    So, I really wanted to become a lawyer since I was 10 years old, and I never really took up any law coaching as such. This is going to segue into my GMAT score. I actually studied for the engineering entrance exams. I got a decent rank in the AIEEE and got on the extended merit list in the IIT as well, but I never wanted to become an engineer. Engineering was always, for me, a backup option.

    Once I got a good score in CLAT and then subsequently a score in AILET, which allowed me admission into National Law University, Delhi, I think it was a slam dunk for me because A, it was Delhi, and B, it was led by Professor Dr. Ranbir Singh, who had basically propped up NALSAR to become one of the best law schools in the country. I was genuinely excited about being part of one of the earlier batches of this institution, which thankfully today continues to be one of the best in the country.

    So, for me, law was always a very clear path. I would say corporate law was not really that clear of a path. It was only during my time working with different law firms that I developed a fascination for corporate law, and when I joined my first firm, I realized that there is a lot of excitement I find in helping businesses navigate challenges.

    I would say that is effectively the mantra that I followed. What do I want to be? I want to be someone who helps companies, businesses, entrepreneurs, and founders solve challenges and help them on the path to growth or to avoid risks from harming that business or harming that proposition. So that’s pretty much how my journey started.

    For my MBA, honestly, that’s a whole other answer. I never imagined that I would do an MBA. I never imagined I would go to INSEAD for my MBA, but yeah, I’ll be happy to discuss that once you want me to discuss it.

    We would love to discuss this immediately because, while you had initially prepared for engineering, you ultimately chose to pursue law. How did you adapt your mindset while preparing for the GMAT, given that it requires precision and a completely different approach compared to the way lawyers typically write? How did you unlearn certain habits, relearn new strategies, and successfully achieve this remarkable result?

    So first, the rationale for why I wanted to do an MBA sort of permeated from me setting up my independent practice. Once I set up my practice, I started engaging more with young founders and entrepreneurs. And because my intention was to help founders and entrepreneurs grow, it required me to deep dive into business and operations with them. I had to understand how they run their businesses, so I had to develop an understanding of business models. I needed to understand how they generate revenue and how they spend that money. I needed to develop an understanding of both accounting and corporate finance, and then I needed to understand what their next step would be.

    One example I can give is that I was advising a blockchain company back in 2021, and they wanted to develop a very unique synthetic trading portal on the blockchain. There was nothing similar like that existing either in India or anywhere else that we could find. We needed to create a structure that would comply with whichever laws were applicable in India because there was nothing that uniquely identified how this business would work.

    Helping that founder create a regulatory-compliant business model made me realize that there is a lot more value that lawyers can bring to companies and to founders because of our unique understanding of how regulations work and how they are applied, and because of our understanding of how impact and value can be created, having seen other founders achieve that. We can effectively leverage all of that exposure and bring value to founders not just from a legal perspective but also from a business perspective.

    All of these things combined started making me think about how I could add more value to these founders, to my clients. I realized that yes, I do have some form of knowledge or experience, but that was all secondhand because it was gained through interacting with C-Suite level executives or founders. There was nothing concrete I could rely on to advise these founders. That is when I started researching more about how MBA programs work, the value-add that someone like me could get, and how I could enhance and leverage the experiences I had in my past.

    That effectively started the journey and the momentum toward giving the GMAT, identifying INSEAD as a potential opportunity, applying for INSEAD, and then getting through. So that’s how that trajectory went.

    In terms of preparing specifically for GMAT, I can condense it very quickly. Yes, there is a lot of unlearning that needs to happen. You are absolutely right. There is a lot of effort required to understand how to solve problems. The idea is, as Indian students, many of us have a predictable set path in which we solve problems, whether quantitative or verbal. But the GMAT is one exam where the strategy is to find whatever way works to arrive at the correct answer.

    This is key in a service industry that relies on a lot of data that must be analyzed, synthesized, and then communicated to a client in a manner the client understands. The GMAT is effectively what you learn in an MBA program, condensed, and ensures that you have that knowledge ready so that you are not lagging behind in an MBA.

    So there was a lot of unlearning and a lot of relearning in terms of how to strategically and tactically approach specific questions, and a lot of practice was needed. I think what people forget is that it is not about how much you know for the GMAT but about how much you have practiced in that kind of environment because it is a very intense examination.

    For example, when I was giving the exam, there were COVID regulations for the admission centers. We had to give the exam in a room with our masks on. We could not take our masks off at all, and we did not have access to anything, including water. It was very strenuous because you are stressed about the exam, there is a timer running, you have to manage your time, you have to ensure that you answer every question, and if you skip a question, you cannot go back.

    So there are many permutations and combinations outside of just pure knowledge. It requires a lot of practice simulated in an exam environment. I think what worked for me was that I pushed myself to simulate that exam environment regularly. And of course, I had the benefit that, since it was my own practice, I could identify time slots every day for practice. But I think being disciplined and serious about what you need to do is the simplest way to achieve a good GMAT score.

    Wow! With your independent practice, you also managed to crack this challenging exam. Considering that you pursued your MBA during the COVID-19 period, a time when many perspectives on management evolved, how did this new understanding of management help you build a stronger practice after completing the course compared to the understanding you had before it? You must have done some comparative analysis on this if you don’t mind sharing, what were your key takeaways?

     That’s absolutely the perfect question because that is the one question I ask a lot of potential applicants who are in the legal field who want to do an MBA.

    That’s the one point I ask them to ask yourself, why are you doing this? What do you hope to gain out of this? Because an MBA is very customized, I would say. It’s a very bespoke course.  Because you’ll get a lot of information and a lot of that information is probably available at 100th of the cost. The question is, what do you want to derive out of that experience?  So I can say personally for me, there were a few factors that were very critical, which I feel I can leverage today after having completed. The first and foremost, and this goes well for most international MBAs, is the network. 

    At INSEAD, I think there is a rule that a particular nationality cannot be represented by more than 11 or 12% of the cohort. So it is by rule that you will be interacting with people from a variety of different geographies, different backgrounds, different experiences, and you are forced to be in that situation.

    When I say forced, it’s by nature of the groups that are set, the sections that are created. You are constantly interacting with people whom you probably may not have anything in connection with prima facie. Like in my group, you would not have another Indian and you would not have another lawyer. You would have people from completely different backgrounds, and I think that helps in two ways.

    Number one, after you graduate, your alumni network is probably one of the strongest in the world. So you can basically look at the alumni directory and you’ll find the who’s who of any industry. So you know, if you are stuck somewhere or you need assistance somewhere, you have an alumni base to rely on and it’s one of the strongest components of INSEAD. Second, you also develop an understanding of how different perceptions can approach different problems. Because when you are given a problem as a group,  as an analytical Indian lawyer, I might solve it in path A.  Someone who works in the renewable energy industries who’s only worked on offshore drilling, they look at that in another path. Someone who’s worked in hardcore finance, hedge fund, or investment banking, they look at that same problem maybe in my direction, but a different path.  Someone who’s an army vet, a Marine operator, they will look at it differently. So when you are interacting with so many different people trying to solve a very similar problem.

    You start getting an understanding of how different people think and what their rationale is for them. And when I look back, that helps me also tackle challenges that my clients face in different ways in which I would’ve never thought, because unfortunately, a lot of lawyers are caught in this bubble of thinking in a very pedantic and a very straight cut method.

     That usually doesn’t happen in an MBA because you are dealt with problems that span different industries and therefore you have to rely on different ways of thinking. So the mental models, the thought processes, the approach, I think that also helps you understand problems from different lenses.  And the last, and another important takeaway for me was how do you value the output more than the process? Because ultimately as a service provider, whether you’re a consultant, whether you’re a banker, whether you’re a lawyer, ultimately your goal is to resolve challenges and solve issues for your clients and do it in a way that they can trust you with their work going on. There’s a very important saying that one of the professors said that you know that you’re a good service provider when your client calls you up for help that is outside your core service. For example, if a client calls you up and says, Hey, Aditya, can you tell me the name of a good pediatric surgeon in Delhi?  That means they trust you for things even outside your core competence.  And how do you develop that trust is what we learned. How do you build processes that help you create that engine that gives them what they want? 

    So that was my takeaway, and that’s what’s helping me optimize and make my practice more efficient. More driven towards solutions rather than process, which may become an obstacle for client service

    The kind of trust your clients place in you is truly inspiring. It seems this trust stems not only from your legal expertise but also from your problem-solving approach, even beyond traditional legal boundaries. Is this the same trust that has enabled you to handle multi-million-dollar, high-stakes deals? Could you share a story of a particularly complex transaction or negotiation where your combined understanding of law and management helped you find a solution that others might have struggled with?

     Sure. So I think the first one, in terms of a complex deal.  I think the most complex deal that I did was one of the biggest deals that I did in my independent practice. It was an acquisition of a logistics company from a listed company.

    So we were acting for the acquirers. And safe to say that I had gained the trust of my clients to the extent that they would trust me with almost 150 crore rupee deal. In the listed company space, and what I realized later was this was going to be an uphill challenge because unlike any other deal that I had done even in my law firm career, this one required me to have a strong understanding of not just basics of M&A and transactional law, but also accounting.

    About how business operations in this industry were, because I had to sit with the client and understand the implications of what the negotiations were going to be, because ultimately those were to be reflected in the transaction document. So having that kind of interaction first with business, then with finance, then trying to understand how those interplay with the legal clauses.

    Then, drafting those clauses and then negotiating with a company that has probably a battery of lawyers that are assisting them because they’re a listed company.  So that was very, very challenging, and it was complex transactions, primarily because there were a lot of payment driven issues because it was effectively a carve out of the listed company.

    They were carving out a business and we were acquiring that business. So how do you create that delineation from now this belongs to us and whatever remains is yours. How the accounting for that is going to be done. And even if there is an agreement on how it’s going to be done in practice, ultimately it’s my job to put it on paper.

     So doing that, and this was before my MBA. So I did not even have that kind of a formal understanding of how finance and accounting work.  I had a bare bones understanding back then,  but it forced me to continuously interact with my client and understand what it is that they’re looking for.

    And I think this is the biggest learning I can give to anyone who’s advising clients on M&A.  Understand what your client wants out of this transaction. Because not every deal is the same. People have different expectations from that transaction. And your job as a counsel and an advisor is to understand what that requirement is and then put it on paper to either ensure it happens or to protect so that it doesn’t get taken away.

    So that deal for me was very challenging because I did not have any assistant, I had another senior lawyer who was working with me. But I needed to understand tax, accounting, employment, labor, and transactional work all on my own. So that was challenging, but very rewarding because we ended up having a very successful team.

    To your second point about interesting negotiations,  very interestingly, after my MBA, one of the deals that I had negotiated was against my earlier firm where I negotiated with one of the lawyers who I mentored back in the firm, and having that kind of interaction with him, trying to recall and leverage all the business side elements of what I wanted to protect for my client and interacting with him on that point was a very good learning for me.

    And it was a very, I would say, smooth process because.  I was very proud of the fact that he also came at me with very logical arguments. And this is another very important point because if this is going out to other lawyers who are in this profession, one thing again that you have to realize is please, whatever arguments you’re making in a negotiation, number one, be very well prepared with what you have to say, why you are asking for what you’re asking.

    And anticipate what the counterparty might say, putting yourself in their position.  Because a lot of time, the only argument you’re giving is, this is market standard. This is what we want. Without giving a rationale, then you’re effectively  moving yourself back from the negotiation table and you’re making it break down.

    So another very important aspect that I learned, especially for negotiations, is that you really need to put in a lot of effort, a lot of work to support what you are saying, why you are saying and why it makes sense. Because at the end of the day, your job is to ensure that there is a solution that works for everyone.

    You cannot drum things down on the other side unless of course you have leverage. But most times when parties are on an equal footing, you need to come with solid arguments, but also help the other side understand. Look, this works for me and it also works for you because A, B, C, and what you are suggesting doesn’t work because of D, E, F.

    So when you give rationale, it is very difficult for the human brain to immediately say no. It makes them think. And once you’re making someone think that, that means you’re moving ahead. So that’s a negotiation strategy that I deployed amongst the other things that I learned. But one thing that I felt very happy about was I could see that what I had learned almost entirely was being replicated by someone who  I basically helped and who’s now a very accomplished lawyer in his own right.

    So I think it was a good negotiation, and that’s the reason why I remember it so well.

    Wow! The way you approach challenges using both legal expertise and analytical skills developed through your MBA is fascinating. How has this combination helped you attract clients like startup founders seeking fundraising and structuring advice? Since law itself demands logical thinking, how did you transition from initially not being inclined toward corporate law to strategically building your expertise in this field? What steps did you take to train yourself to handle these challenges analytically and logically?

    I read a lot. The simplest answer is I read a lot. I put myself in situations where I was forced to be the one doing the grunt work. One example I can recall from the first firm I worked at was that we had one of the best corporate law libraries I can think of. There were books on M&A and transactions that I don’t think many law firms in India would have had access to.

    When I had access to that library and to some of the best corporate lawyers in the country, I was as inquisitive as a young lawyer could be. I would always read up on different transactions. I would read about how contracts are framed. I would read about best practices in the United States or the United Kingdom. I would read case laws during my off time. I would review transaction documents signed by the firm 10 or even 15 years ago.

    So, once I became interested in the business of transaction law—or any subject for that matter—it was always about putting myself in a situation where I could learn whatever I wanted to know about it. I would find resources, read, and absorb as much as I could. And now, this has become 10 times easier because all research often requires is a simple prompt. I think research has become easier, but at the end of the day, it’s about reading the full article or the complete chapter of a book and understanding it deeply.

    For me, developing this analytical skillset has always been through reading a lot and talking to a lot of lawyers. Whenever I was on a deal with someone who did things I didn’t understand, I would never hesitate to ask them, “Why did you say that? What was the point you were making in this argument? Why was this so important?” You’d be surprised at how many senior lawyers genuinely appreciate junior lawyers coming up and asking such questions.

    I would urge a lot of lawyers, especially those in law firms, to never hesitate in approaching your senior associate or principal associate and asking, “Why is this happening?” This is also a very important point for potential leaders. Whether you are becoming a senior associate, a principal associate, or a partner, whenever you are delegating work, it is imperative that you explain why you are doing it and what you are expecting from the team. This not only enhances their comprehension of the problem but also ensures that they remain focused on the outcome.

    For me, developing that thought process was both as a learner and as someone who mentored young lawyers and interns. Constantly engaging in that way made it second nature to me. Whenever a problem statement comes before me, I can immediately identify the key aspects—the fact pattern, the trigger points, and the interests that the client needs addressed.

    One of the first things I do when I take on a mandate is to talk to the client and understand what a successful outcome looks like for them. This is something I find many lawyers overlook. Even before my MBA, I always focused on this, but after my MBA, I learned that a successful advisor not only understands what the client needs but also helps the client define what they truly want. Sometimes clients are not equipped to frame their needs clearly. It is your job to guide them—to be like Gandalf for them, mentoring and advising them in a way that helps them discover the most viable solution.

    It’s all about constant interaction, continuous updating of knowledge, and being hungry to understand things. In every form of communication—whether on WhatsApp, email, or in conversations with juniors or seniors—you must have clarity in what you are saying and why you are saying it.

    Over time, it all becomes second nature. At least, that’s what has happened to me.

    Being an avid reader and someone who has never hesitated to question and learn from seniors, how has this curiosity shaped you into an approachable mentor? You’ve guided many aspiring legal professionals, how does it feel to see your mentees succeed, and what key advice or guiding principles do you usually share with them that our learners could benefit from?

    I’m very passionate about this, so I’d love to talk more about this. One, how I started, again, my inquisitive nature always made me question everything. And it was not just in a law firm; it was even at home. Why is this the way? Why is that the way? And because I had a background in science, it was always that questioning of why something happens.

    Unless you understand the why, you’re never going to understand the process itself. So you need to know why something happens. There has to be a reason behind it. And that prompted me to be very inquisitive. Based on that, I spoke to a lot of people. Sometimes I would be shooed away, but a lot of times I would be given a patient ear.

    And also, in a way, because I was instrumental in helping form the internship strategy at one of my firms, it made me interact with a lot of interns. Throughout that journey, I realized that interns also come to a law firm with the expectation of learning. They are not just there as law students who are expected to do a lot of grunt work or research work; they also have an expectation from the law firm. I learned that while interning in some of the best law firms in the country, a couple of them in fact, and there I got a sense of understanding what work goes on in a law firm.

    But there is also that learning that happens from some of the senior lawyers, which is absolutely incomparable because they know how things work in practice. What you are studying in law school is a lot of academic knowledge. So it was my role that because I got that, I had to give it forward, and I enjoyed doing that.

    I enjoyed speaking with interns one-on-one throughout my time in all the law firms that I worked with, and even now. Now the question is, how do I do it? Again, it’s a very similar way to how I work with clients. My first question to a lot of them is, I need to understand why are you here? Why are we talking?

    What is it that you hope to achieve out of this? There are people who come asking me for advice on how to manage toxicity in the workplace, which is unfortunately a very important topic but is very prevalent. A lot of people ask, I want to shift from a law firm to in-house. How do I do that?

    The first question I ask is why? What’s problematic in that law firm? What is it that you have identified that you cannot work for? If someone asks me, okay, I’m a lawyer who’s doing disputes, I want to go do an MBA, my first question is why? Have you asked yourself why you want to do this? Is it the money? Do you want to do law, or do you want to do law with that understanding?

    So the way I talk to students, mentors, and young lawyers is first I ask them what their motivations are. So it’s sort of like helping them drill down in their own mind what it is that they have to speak about when they come to me. And my role is mostly to help them realize what it is that they want and then give them my understanding with a very clear caveat.

    I am not a counselor. I am not a career guide, and I’m not, let’s say, an MBA coach. I can only tell you what worked for me, and there is nothing to say that what worked for me will work for you. So please take what I say with a pinch of salt. But what I can tell you are the principles that I applied; they are very likely to probably be relevant in your field because the principles are very straightforward.

    Have clarity of thought, understand the motivation behind any action, whether it’s speech or whether it’s written. Understand the implications or have an idea of what the implications of those actions would be, and then if you’re okay with the implications, go achieve that outcome in a strategic manner.

    Understand what it is that you want to do and then lay out a plan of action. Don’t just go headfirst into a situation and say, I’ll take things as they come, because that’s inefficient. One thing I keep telling people is law requires you to be efficient because at any point in time, you’re juggling five things.

    So if you’re not efficient, you are bound to drop the ball. And the best way to not drop it is to have some sort of structure, some sort of, I would say in a crude sense, an SOP. If a project comes, then I do A, B, C. If X happens, then Y is the outcome. While it takes time, the moment it gets crystallized, it becomes a very standard operating process for anyone.

    It then just becomes like a program. Once something comes, you know the path that you have to follow. So your brain is then only focused on exactly the substance, not the administrative process around it. And that helps a lot of people realize their own value, their own way of working. Some people work visually, some people work through reading.

    Some are more analytical than others, but then they find what it truly is that they want, and that’s when it’s more of a eureka moment for some of them. Obviously not everyone has that, but that’s my path. It’s not spoon-feeding. It is effectively helping them understand who they are, what it is that they want, and how they can do that.

    I can help you create a path to it, but what you want to do, that’s up to you. And then it applies everywhere, whether it’s professional or personal, whether it’s within the law or outside the law.

    Navigating such a demanding career, how do you maintain a balance between mental and physical health, especially when long hours and tight deadlines are involved? What strategies have worked for you to stay productive without burning out? Additionally, looking ahead, what are your plans for the next few years in terms of your career and practice, especially after transitioning from law to also pursuing an MBA?

    I can speak for hours because that is such an important aspect that I’ve realized. Unfortunately, a bit later in my professional life, but better late than never in my view. So I cannot stress enough how important managing your mental health and physical health is, especially in a career like law.

    I don’t think I need to go into the details of why it’s important. I think it is now an absolute truth that you need to maintain every aspect of your body, whether it’s the physical body or the mental body. You have to, if you want to lead a life that you are content with. There is no question about it.

    And I think that’s pretty much a given. How to do that is a major point. One thing I felt in my own life, even without having maybe the knowledge that I do today, is I could take care of my physical health because I wanted to. Right from the day I started working, in fact, a year before I started working, I made sure that I made it a habit to do some form of physical workout every single week, maybe four to six times continuously. Once it became a habit for me for, let’s say, over a month or two months, if I remember correctly, then it became an indispensable part of my daily routine, and I think that’s what’s most crucial. Once you make something a part of your routine, then it becomes something that you don’t need to think about.

    Yes, there is that initial inertia that prevents you from doing things that you know are important. That’s where actual growth is. If you push yourself through for a short period of time, once it becomes part of the routine, in fact, you feel the other way. There was this period of time when I was undergoing some physical issues where I couldn’t go to the gym, and I genuinely felt that I was missing out on something during the day because it feels that once I work out, once I come back to work, I feel motivated and invigorated. A physical workout of any kind, whether it’s running, walking, yoga, going to the gym, swimming, any form of physical exercise that elevates your heart rate and makes you sweat a little bit, is, I think, very crucial not just for your physical health, but it also has an impact on mental health.

    And when it comes to mental health, there is this saying that everyone should meditate for 20 minutes a day, except when you are really busy and stressed. In that case, you have to meditate for 40 minutes a day. What people don’t realize is the value in that statement is so deep that unless you do it, you will not realize it.

    Meditation doesn’t mean that you have to go to a particular place; if that works for you, great. But meditation is effectively calming your thoughts. It’s not about having no thoughts, but mindful meditation. The one that I follow is just having comfort in knowing that whatever you are thinking is okay, and you let it pass without judgment.

    Simply put, giving yourself 15 to 20 minutes a day, anytime during the day, where there is calm, where you are not worried about the next message, the next meeting, or a call that’s supposed to happen. The impact that that period of calmness has on your day, and if you do it over a period of time in your life in general, really helps you also become a better lawyer.

    I’ll give you an example. There are a lot of times in a lawyer’s life when, during negotiations, things can get very heated, and I have seen lawyers lose their cool in conversations. One thing I felt after I started meditating is that my reaction to a lot of unnecessary verbiage that’s thrown in a negotiation is much lower.

    I don’t react impulsively anymore, and what that does is it not only shows that you are the bigger person when you are keeping your calm while the other person might be shouting, but it also shows your client that you are confident about the path that you’re following. Ultimately, if your client sees that confidence in you, then that means you’re doing something right as his or her advisor.

    So it’s not just about feeling good about yourself. All of these things actually also help you become a better lawyer as well. It helps you deal with the stresses that the life of a lawyer will inevitably throw at you. It is a given that a lawyer’s life will have stress. There is no escaping that.

    Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded, or they’re probably practicing law in a way I have never seen. But stress is effectively in the nature of the legal career, and the only way is, you don’t wish for stress to go away, you learn to deal with it, and you learn to manage it. One of the best ways to manage it for me turns out to be meditation.

    So I think it is absolutely critical.

    Get in touch with Aditya Singha –