Super Lawyer

Author: SuperLawyerTeam

  • “If I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today.” – Rahul Anil Khanna, Founder & Managing Partner at RAKlaw.

    “If I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today.” – Rahul Anil Khanna, Founder & Managing Partner at RAKlaw.

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

    With over a decade of experience in corporate legal affairs, what initially drew you to the legal profession? Was it a planned pursuit, or did your interest in law evolve over time?

    To be candid, I never planned for my career to shape the way it eventually did. I’ve always believed in the power of timing and going with the flow, and in many ways, the legal profession found me rather than the other way around. Initially, law was more of a functional career choice. However, my interest in the profession evolved significantly during the early years of my corporate tenure.

    One of the key turning points was the mentorship I received. I was fortunate to work under a senior who not only trusted me but gave me a free hand to deal with matters independently—whether it was navigating compliance, handling regulatory inquiries, or representing the company before statutory bodies. This autonomy instilled a sense of responsibility and curiosity in me.

    I found myself increasingly drawn to the strategic aspect of legal work—how sound legal advice can influence business decisions, mitigate risks, and protect long-term interests. Over time, I began to view the legal function not merely as support but as a value driver within the organization. That shift in perspective was what truly cemented my commitment to the legal profession.

    Looking back, what started as a role gradually transformed into a passion. Today, whether it’s regulatory strategy, dispute resolution, or guiding startups through complex compliance landscapes, I find immense satisfaction in the challenges and the continuous learning the field offers.

    You’re currently building a specialized platform for startups in the food sector. What are some of the most frequent compliance challenges these businesses face, and how does the platform help them navigate these hurdles in a practical way?

    Yes, this has been an idea in the making for quite some time. Having closely observed the food and beverage (F&B) sector, particularly by attending various industry exhibitions and trade fairs, I realized there’s a significant gap in legal awareness and compliance readiness among startups in this space. The food industry in India is evolving rapidly. In fact, according to Invest India, the Indian F&B sector is expected to reach USD 535 billion by 2025, driven by changing consumer preferences, innovation, and a rising number of food startups entering the market each year.

    The most frequent compliance challenges startups face are quite fundamental yet critical:

    1. Understanding Regulatory Applicability – Startups often struggle to determine which specific licenses or approvals apply to their product. For example, a plant-based dairy alternative cannot simply replicate the compliance of traditional dairy—its classification and labeling requirements are entirely different.
    2. Knowing Whom to Approach – Navigating through authorities like FSSAI, Legal Metrology, State FDAs, and Pollution Control Boards is overwhelming. Startups don’t know where to begin, especially when their business model spans multiple states or channels (offline, D2C, exports).
    3. Copying Industry Leaders Blindly – Many new entrants simply mimic compliance templates of large FMCG companies, not realizing that their own product category or manufacturing model requires a tailored approach.

    This is exactly where our upcoming platform aims to make a difference. It’s being developed as a one-stop ecosystem that not only offers end-to-end compliance support—from FSSAI licensing, label reviews, and legal metrology filings to EPR and state-wise registrations—but also provides legal representation when issues escalate into litigation or adjudication.

    The idea is to simplify legal compliance through practical tools, updated regulatory content, and access to on-demand legal professionals who specialize in this domain. The platform is currently in development, and while I can’t share all the details just yet, I can say that it’s being built to bridge a very real and very critical gap in the F&B startup ecosystem.

    In the early stages of your career, were there any specific experiences or turning points that deepened your understanding of food laws and regulatory compliance, ultimately guiding you to specialize in this domain?

    Yes, there were many such moments. In fact, I often say that having someone place their trust in you early on can completely shape your professional path. I was fortunate to work under mentors who gave me the autonomy to explore, question, and resolve matters independently. That freedom helped me develop a deep, ground-level understanding of how regulations intersect with real business challenges.

    One of the turning points was dealing with a product recall that originated from a minor labeling non-compliance. It seemed procedural at first, but the impact was operational, reputational, and financial. That experience taught me that in food law, every word and symbol on a label carries legal weight—and the smallest error can have disproportionate consequences. It was in those moments that my interest in regulatory compliance truly deepened.

    Even during my corporate tenure, I made it a point to work across functions—marketing, manufacturing, supply chain—not just to advise them legally, but to understand how decisions were being made on the ground. I always tell the juniors and interns who work with me: don’t wait for permission to get curious. Even if you’re a legal person and your idea in a marketing meeting feels like the dimmest one—speak up. You’ll be surprised how often the “outsider’s perspective” helps, and how much it sharpens your understanding of your own role.

    And then, after I transitioned from the corporate setup into independent practice, my learning curve accelerated even more. When you’re working closely with startups and entrepreneurs, especially in the food sector, you begin to see firsthand the complexities and creativity that go into new product development. The challenges are dynamic—whether it’s decoding novel ingredients, managing multi-state compliances, or responding to evolving FSSAI regulations.

    Just take a step back and look at the food landscape today. Think about it—five years ago, how many pre-packed food products did we really see in our daily lives? Comparatively few. Today, nearly everything we consume—snacks, beverages, condiments, ready-to-cook meals—is pre-packaged. It’s no longer occasional; it’s integral to our routine. The scope of this sector in the next five to ten years is massive, not just in terms of business growth but also from a regulatory standpoint. It’s an exciting space to be in, and being part of this transformation—while ensuring that safety and compliance go hand-in-hand with innovation—continues to drive my work every day.

    Your work spans labour laws, dispute resolution, and policy development. Could you share an experience where you handled a complex labour law issue? How do you stay agile and adapt to the evolving legal landscape in this domain?

    Absolutely. One of the most complex and insightful matters I’ve dealt with involved assessing the legal validity of a widespread retainership model adopted by a leading cosmetics brand that operated across various retail formats—including exclusive brand outlets, modern trade counters, and general trade counters.

    The company had deployed over 2,000 personnel—primarily as “Beauty Consultants”—engaged on fixed-term retainership contracts. On paper, these individuals were termed as ‘Consultants’ with monthly invoices raised for services rendered. However, upon closer scrutiny, it became evident that the structure did not hold up to the legal tests used to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship.

    We undertook a detailed legal review, mapping the operational realities against judicial benchmarks laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Balwant Rai Saluja v. Air India Ltd.—specifically focusing on elements like who appoints, who supervises, who pays, who disciplines, and whether continuity of service exists. Our findings revealed that despite the nomenclature of “retainer” or “consultant,” these individuals were under direct control, supervision, and functional command of the management. They were hired, transferred, granted leave, and even disciplined by company supervisors. In other words, the arrangement was more of an employment model disguised as consultancy.

    The risk exposure was significant—both under the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, and under core labour laws like the Payment of Gratuity Act, ESI Act, and Maternity Benefit Act. Moreover, since there was no contractor involved, the management couldn’t take shelter under the principal-employer framework either. We advised a comprehensive review and reclassification of roles, alongside a phased transition towards compliant staffing structures, to mitigate future litigation and regulatory risk.

    This matter underscored the importance of not just legal drafting, but understanding how the structure plays out on the ground. Labour laws in India are heavily precedent-based and interpretive—courts tend to prioritize substance over form. So, staying agile means continuously aligning HR practices with legal reality, adapting to new judgments, and anticipating regulatory scrutiny—not reacting to it.

    Matters like this also highlight why I’ve always believed in being proactive rather than reactive. Labour compliance isn’t about ticking boxes—it’s about ensuring that your internal structures can stand up to judicial and regulatory scrutiny when tested. That’s the mindset I bring to every assignment in this domain.

    You’ve overseen compliance across diverse marketing channels, including traditional advertising and influencer-led campaigns. What are some of the major legal challenges in this space, and how do you help brands align creative strategies with regulations such as ASCI guidelines and emerging digital marketing norms?

    This is an area where legal, regulatory, and creative disciplines intersect in very real and often challenging ways. Over the past few years, marketing strategies have evolved rapidly—from traditional print and television ads to influencer-driven digital content and real-time engagement campaigns. And while the mediums have changed, the legal obligations have only become more layered.

    One of the core challenges is balancing creative freedom with regulatory compliance. Whether it’s the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, or ASCI’s Code for Self-Regulation in Advertising—every product category, particularly in the FMCG and food space, comes with defined boundaries for advertising claims, disclosures, and substantiation.

    For instance, brands often want to use superlatives like “best,” “purest,” or “clinically proven,” but may lack the documentary evidence or test reports to substantiate such claims. In such cases, I advise internal marketing and product teams right from the conceptualization stage—ensuring that claims are backed by appropriate documentation, lab tests, or consumer studies, and that disclaimers are clear, visible, and compliant with ASCI standards.

    With influencer marketing, the challenges are different—but equally significant. The ASCI Guidelines for Influencer Advertising in Digital Media, coupled with recent enforcement advisories from the Department of Consumer Affairs, have made it mandatory for influencers to clearly disclose paid partnerships, sponsored content, or brand affiliations through unambiguous tags like #Ad or #Sponsored. Many influencers—and even brand teams—are unaware that simply gifting a product or offering a barter collaboration also qualifies as a material connection requiring disclosure.

    In my experience, one of the key gaps is the lack of structured compliance protocols for influencer campaigns. To address this, I’ve helped several brands develop standard influencer contracts, compliance checklists, and pre-approval workflows. These documents cover not just disclosure requirements, but also ensure that influencers do not make unauthorized or misleading claims—especially in regulated sectors like health supplements, beauty, and food products. For example, using a phrase like “immunity booster” or “approved by FSSAI” without factual basis or regulatory clearance could expose the brand to penal action.

    Another area that requires careful navigation is comparative advertising—where brands position themselves as superior to competitors. While permitted in principle, comparative ads must be truthful, fair, and not disparaging. This line can be thin, and I’ve often had to work closely with creative agencies to ensure that the tone, visuals, and language don’t cross into unlawful denigration, which could trigger litigation under trademark law or consumer protection statutes.

    Moreover, platform-specific policies—like ad restrictions on Meta, Google, and YouTube—add another layer of compliance. Certain product categories, such as tobacco, alcohol, or even baby food, face restrictions not just under Indian laws but also under global content moderation guidelines. It becomes essential to harmonize regulatory approvals with platform rules and ensure that every campaign is vetted through both lenses.

    To manage all of this in real time, I advocate a cross-functional compliance model—where marketing, legal, product, and digital teams work in collaboration. I also conduct periodic training and workshops to keep teams updated on evolving norms, such as influencer disclosures, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, and amendments under the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules.

    In conclusion, marketing compliance isn’t just about saying “no” to risky ideas—it’s about helping brands communicate creatively within a legally sustainable framework. My role has always been to enable campaigns, not obstruct them—by anticipating risk, offering alternatives, and ensuring that creativity and compliance coexist seamlessly.

    In managing compliance under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), what were the biggest challenges, and how did you ensure consistent compliance and legal challenges?
    Oh my God—what a question to ask!

    When it comes to managing compliance under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), you’re stepping into one of the most tightly regulated spaces in Indian law. This isn’t just about compliance—it’s about navigating a minefield of statutory restrictions that govern everything from advertising and packaging to distribution and point-of-sale visibility.

    The biggest challenge? Communication. Since both direct and surrogate advertising are prohibited, the question becomes: How do you inform a consumer about something new—without actually telling them? You’re managing a brand that legally can’t raise its voice.

    And here’s the beauty of it: when an entire company is working on launching a product, figuring out how to communicate it to the world becomes a massive, complex challenge. This is where great marketing minds meet great legal minds, united by two shared missions: to communicate, and to protect. It’s chess, not checkers.

    I won’t reveal the specific tools or tactics—that’s confidential—but working in such a constrained environment forces innovation like few other sectors. Legal and commercial teams must operate not just with creativity, but with precision. You need real-time awareness of law, razor-sharp risk judgment, and a deep understanding of regulatory nuances.

    And remember, compliance here isn’t a one-time checkbox—it’s a full-time business philosophy. From pictorial warnings that occupy 85% of the pack, to ensuring the retail shelf doesn’t accidentally violate visibility norms, every pixel and placement matters. One slip, and you’re looking at fines, seizures, or even criminal prosecution.

    Ultimately, the art lies in keeping the business alive and thriving—without crossing the legal line. That’s the real thrill of COTPA compliance. You’re not just managing law—you’re helping the business whisper where others shout.

    After a successful corporate career, what motivated you to establish your own independent practice? What were some of the initial challenges you faced during the transition, and how did your in-house experience shape the way you now deliver client-focused legal solutions?

    To be very honest, when you work in a corporate environment for years and start doing the same set of tasks repeatedly, you eventually hit a point where you feel like you’ve plateaued. The ideas don’t flow like they used to, the work starts to feel cyclical, and somewhere along the way, you stop growing. That’s when I knew — I needed to shake things up.

    I’ve always believed in the power of timing. I didn’t leave my in-house role because I was unprepared — in fact, I had long dreamt of building something of my own. But as life would have it, it was a mix of circumstance, instinct, and courage that eventually pushed me over the edge. And I’ve never looked back. I firmly believe that situations never remain constant, and if you don’t evolve with them, you’re choosing stagnation. I chose the challenge.

    Starting an independent practice isn’t easy — far from it. The first and biggest question is: Where do you begin? You no longer have structured teams, support systems, or a fixed agenda. In fact, there were days — and weeks — where I didn’t have a full calendar. But I kept showing up. I’d read, draft, network, and build systems because this was a path I chose, and failure wasn’t an option. Especially when others start relying on you — clients, juniors, peers — it becomes more than just your own dream.

    Luckily, I had unknowingly been preparing for this for years. During my in-house career, I was fortunate to work with mentors who encouraged us to take ownership of everything end-to-end — be it compliance audits, litigation strategy, contract vetting, or regulatory filings. There was no outsourcing mindset; everything was handled in-house. That exposure helped me develop a problem-solving mindset — not just legally, but strategically.

    Of course, transitioning to the client side required a different skill: visibility. You can be the best lawyer, but if people don’t know you exist, it doesn’t matter. So I had to put myself out there — make calls, write emails, meet people, follow up, and tell my story. My interpersonal skills and relationship-building approach really helped in that phase. I didn’t chase big-ticket clients; instead, I focused on building long-term retainers — even if modest at first — because they provide continuity, predictability, and a chance to grow with the client.

    In fact, cracking a few retainers with early-stage startups was a turning point. Working with startups taught me how to simplify complex legal frameworks into actionable advice, and how to be more accessible, responsive, and solution-oriented. These experiences reinforced a client-first mindset — something I deeply value in my current practice.

    Today, I run a growing independent practice, and I can say with confidence that my corporate background gave me a solid foundation — but the real learning came when I stepped into the unknown. It taught me resilience, humility, and the sheer joy of building something of your own, one client and one challenge at a time.

    Looking ahead, how do you envision the growth of your practice and your role within it? Additionally, what advice would you offer to students aspiring to build a career in your area of specialization?

    To be honest — and I’ve said this before too — I’ve never been someone who envisions too far ahead. I firmly believe in time. As the Bhagavad Gita says, “Kaalasya chalanam anivarya hai” — time never stops, and you never really know what tomorrow holds. I just keep my head steady and walk the path in front of me. One step at a time.

    I didn’t start with a 5-year plan or a vision board. Life pushed, and I moved — that’s always been my way. You adapt, stay honest with your effort, and trust that the path you’ve chosen will unfold as it should.

    Over the years, I’ve had the chance to work with some incredible interns — all unique in their own way. Some were quiet, in their shell. Others were confident and unfiltered. But all of them, truly, were just awesome to work with. And honestly, I’ve learned a lot more from them than they probably learned from me.

    One thing I always tell my interns: you have to teach me five things before you leave. It can be anything — a new productivity tool, a Gen Z slang like “no cap”, “it’s giving”, or “let’s soft launch this idea”, or even something random like a new music genre or their favorite YouTube rabbit hole. One of my interns was so passionate about reviewing movies, he actually created a rating matrix — acting: 8/10, story: 6.5, background score: 9, cinematography: 7.2 — I mean, it was serious business for him! And I loved it. That kind of passion — whatever the field — is what matters.

    So if I have any advice for students, it’s this: please don’t follow a path just because it looks safe or conventional. Follow your curiosity. You don’t have to know everything today. And even if you choose law — you don’t need to pick a specialization on Day 1. Initially, you’ll do a bit of everything — contracts, compliance, litigation, drafting, maybe even filing! Let it all come. It’ll take shape with time.

    Whatever you do, just stay open. Learn from everyone — juniors, seniors, clients, even strangers. And don’t be afraid of uncertainty. Sometimes not knowing what comes next is the best part of the journey.

    Get in touch with Rahul Anil Khanna –

  • “Reflecting on my journey, from a wide-eyed intern in Mr. Jethmalani’s chambers to leading Asal Legal Solution LLP, my greatest takeaway is that advocacy is a blend of conviction and compassion.” – Akash Kakade, Advocate Supreme Court of India.

    “Reflecting on my journey, from a wide-eyed intern in Mr. Jethmalani’s chambers to leading Asal Legal Solution LLP, my greatest takeaway is that advocacy is a blend of conviction and compassion.” – Akash Kakade, Advocate Supreme Court of India.

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

    Early in your career, you had the opportunity to work with various big names in the legal field. What were some of the most enriching experiences from those formative years that deepened your passion for the legal profession?

    The privilege of working under legal titans like Mr. Ram Jethmalani and Mr. Fali S. Nariman during my early years was akin to stepping into a masterclass in advocacy. In 2007, while interning with Mr. Jethmalani, I was thrust into the frenetic pace of a high-profile criminal case at the Supreme Court. I vividly recall his electrifying presence in court, where he dismantled a prosecution’s argument with razor-sharp logic and an almost theatrical flair. One evening, as we prepared for a hearing in the high-profile Jessica Lall murder case, he shared a gem: “The law is not just about statutes; it’s about storytelling that moves hearts and minds.” This perspective transformed my understanding of advocacy, igniting a passion for crafting compelling narratives grounded in legal rigor.

    Similarly, in 2009, assisting Mr. Nariman on a constitutional matter was a revelation. His meticulous analysis of Article 14 during a late-night briefing session taught me the art of weaving constitutional principles into practical arguments. Watching him argue before a Constitution Bench, I saw how his calm demeanour and scholarly depth commanded respect, reinforcing my belief that advocacy is as much about integrity as it is about intellect. These experiences cemented my love for the courtroom, where law becomes a living instrument of justice. I also remember an incidence where he asked me to draft something several times thereafter just near my breakpoint, asked me to get all the drafts and approved the 1st draft which I had shared saying it was the best one and I ought to have shown it to him. I didn’t understand the meaning of it then, however over a period of time I realised he taught me several valuable professional and life lessons through it.

    Your academic and professional background is both impressive and diverse. Could you take us back to the initial experiences that sparked your interest in the field of law?

    My fascination with law was born when our family friend Mr Jethmalani visited our home at Nagpur and there were tons of people there to visit him. I belong to a freedom fighters family and a family which has always been into social work, i was used to people visiting home. However people visiting Mr Jethmalani had a different approach and the respect commanded by him simply left an everlasting and permanent impression on me. He asked me “what I want to become when I grow up?”, I naively asked him, “what do you do?”, to which he said “I am a lawyer son”, so I promptly replied that I want to become a lawyer as well. That is the 1st time I said that and it was etched in my mind since then, as a teenager in 2001. That moment was electric, it showed me the law’s power to uplift the voiceless and the respect one commands with being true to one’s profession. My school debates on issues like caste discrimination and women’s rights further fueled this spark, as I realized advocacy could bridge ideals and action.

    This conviction led me to pursue a B.A. LL.B. at RTM Nagpur University, where I immersed myself in moot courts and legal aid clinics. A particularly memorable experience was organizing a legal awareness camp for rural farmers and downtrodden on the occasion of Dusshera Festival in Nagpur under the aegis of our political science professor , where I explained various faucets of laws in Marathi, my mother tongue. Seeing their faces light up with newfound understanding solidified my resolve to make law accessible and impactful, setting the course for my career.

    Your educational journey from RTM Nagpur University to Queen Mary University of London is inspiring. What motivated you to pursue an LL.M. in Commercial and Corporate Law abroad, and in what ways has that international exposure shaped your current practice before the Supreme Court of India?

    The decision to pursue an LL.M. at Queen Mary University of London was driven by a realization that India’s legal landscape was becoming increasingly globalized. By 2010, I had seen how multinational corporations and cross-border disputes were reshaping commercial litigation in India. I chose Queen Mary for its reputation in international commercial law and arbitration, aiming to master the nuances of global legal frameworks. The program’s modules, International Commercial Arbitration, Commercial Conflict of Laws, and Intellectual Property in Creative Industries, were intellectually exhilarating, challenging me to think beyond Indian jurisprudence.

    A defining moment was my dissertation on pre-arbitral interim relief, which required analysing cases from multiple jurisdictions. This global perspective proved invaluable when I returned to India. For instance, in the ABG Shipyard Swiss Challenge Process case at the Supreme Court, my understanding of international insolvency frameworks allowed me to craft arguments that aligned Indian law with global best practices. My London experience also honed my ability to navigate cultural and legal diversity, enabling me to represent clients like PT. Bara Daya Energi etc. with confidence. Today, this international lens informs my Supreme Court practice, blending global insights with constitutional rigor.

    You’ve appeared in several high-profile Constitution Bench matters, including the EWS Reservation and PMLA Validity cases. How have such landmark litigations influenced your legal philosophy and approach to constitutional interpretation?

    Appearing in Constitution Bench matters like the EWS Reservation and Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) Validity cases has been a humbling and transformative journey. The EWS case, which upheld reservations for economically weaker sections, taught me the importance of purposive interpretation to advance social justice. I recall a heated courtroom exchange where we debated the balance between equality and affirmative action, moments that underscored the Constitution’s role as a living document adapting to societal needs.

    The PMLA case, challenging the validity of stringent anti-money laundering provisions, was equally profound. It highlighted the delicate interplay between state power and individual liberties, shaping my belief in proportionality as a cornerstone of constitutional interpretation. These cases have instilled a legal philosophy that views the Constitution as a dynamic framework, requiring advocates to harmonize fundamental rights with directive principles. My approach now emphasizes rigorous research, contextual analysis, and a commitment to ensuring that constitutional interpretations serve both justice and the public good.

    As the Founding Managing Partner of Asal Legal Solution LLP, how do you navigate the demands of leadership while actively engaging in high-stakes litigation before the Supreme Court? What motivated you to establish your own practice in the first place?

    Leading Asal Legal Solution LLP while litigating before the Supreme Court demands a delicate balance of vision, discipline, and teamwork. As Founding Managing Partner since, I’ve built a firm that thrives on collaboration and innovation. I delegate research and drafting to a talented team of associates, empowering them to take ownership while I focus on courtroom advocacy and strategy. We use case management software (Libra) to streamline workflows, ensuring I can prepare for high-stakes cases like the Maratha Reservation matter without compromising firm operations. Evening team meetings foster open communication, allowing us to tackle complex cases with agility.

    My motivation to establish Asal Legal stemmed from a desire to create a practice that blends ethical advocacy with client-centric innovation. After years at Desai & Associates, I saw an opportunity to address gaps in legal services, particularly for clients navigating both Indian and international jurisdictions. Founding my own firm allowed me to take on diverse cases, from constitutional benches to international arbitrations, while mentoring the next generation of advocates. This independence has been liberating, enabling me to shape a legacy of impactful litigation.

    Your consistent involvement in social initiatives, particularly through the Maratha Sewa Sangh, reflects a strong commitment to public service. How do you strike a balance between your legal practice and social responsibilities?

    My involvement with Maratha Sewa Sangh and other initiatives is a natural extension of my belief that law must serve society and as a member of society one must give back to the society. As President of its Legal Cell since 2023, I’ve spearheaded legal aid camps and policy advocacy for marginalized communities, often working late evenings after court hours. For instance, organizing the first All India Conference for Rashtriya Maratha Seva Sangh was a logistical challenge, but my team’s support at Asal Legal ensured seamless coordination. I allocate specific days for social initiatives, using weekends for community outreach while reserving weekdays for litigation.

    This balance is fuelled by my conviction that legal expertise carries a responsibility to uplift. My team handles routine legal tasks, freeing me to draft policy recommendations or write columns for Organiser and Kashmir Canvas. These activities recharge me, as the gratitude of a farmer understanding his land rights or a student inspired by a legal talk mirrors the fulfilment I find in courtroom victories. This synergy ensures that my legal practice and social commitments reinforce each other.

    For law students aspiring to build a litigation practice like yours, what advice would you offer? What skills, mindset, or resources do you believe are essential for excelling in this demanding field?

    To law students dreaming of a litigation career, my advice is to embrace the grind with passion and purpose. Litigation is a marathon, not a sprint, so cultivate resilience to navigate setbacks like losing a case or facing a tough bench. Key skills include:

    • Legal Research: Be well versed with law and for that master platforms like SCC Online in order to build airtight arguments.
    • Drafting: Hone the art of concise, persuasive pleadings, every word matters in court.
    • Oral Advocacy: Practice clarity and confidence through moot courts and mock trials.
    • Networking: Seek mentorship from senior advocates; my internships with Mr. Jethmalani and others were game-changers.

    Adopt a growth mindset, view challenges as opportunities to learn as was taught to be by Mr Nariman. Early in my career, a dismissed petition taught me to anticipate judicial perspectives, sharpening my strategy. Resources like legal journals, bar association seminars, and internships in litigation chambers are invaluable. Above all, uphold integrity and empathy; clients trust advocates who fight for their cause with heart. Stay curious, stay ethical, and let your passion for justice drive you.

    Litigation can be incredibly intense and high-pressure. How do you manage the stress that comes with maintaining a rigorous legal practice, and what do you do to safeguard your mental well-being?

    The intensity of Supreme Court litigation, where deadlines loom and stakes soar, demands a robust approach to stress management. I start each day with 30 minutes of yoga and meditation, a ritual that grounds me and sharpens focus. A particularly vivid memory is meditating before arguing the auction case, which calmed my nerves and clarified my arguments. Regular runs in Talkatora Gardens and a disciplined diet keep me physically resilient, countering the sedentary demands of legal work.

    Professionally, I rely on my team at Asal Legal to share the load, delegating research and filings to avoid burnout. I set boundaries, reserving evenings for family or reading historical biographies, which offer perspective on life’s pressures. My social initiatives, like blood donation camps with Maratha Sewa Sangh, are surprisingly rejuvenating, helping others reminds me of the law’s broader purpose. These practices, combined with a supportive network of peers, ensure I thrive in the high-pressure world of litigation.

    Looking back at your journey so far from internships with iconic legal figures to leading your own firm, what has been your biggest takeaway or guiding principle as a legal professional?

    Reflecting on my journey, from a wide-eyed intern in Mr. Jethmalani’s chambers to leading Asal Legal Solution LLP, my greatest takeaway is that advocacy is a blend of conviction and compassion. Whether arguing a marathon case or advising a small business like ILA Naturals, I’ve learned that the law’s true power lies in its ability to humanize disputes. My guiding principle is to approach every case with unwavering integrity and a deep understanding of the client’s story. This means not just winning arguments but ensuring justice resonates, whether for a corporation or a community. This ethos, forged through years of mentorship and practice, drives me to leave a lasting impact on both law and lives.

    Get in touch with Akash Kakade –

  • “In today’s legal environment, being a litigator is not just about knowing the  law but it is about being responsive, reading people, handling pressure and  adapting quickly.” – Reshma Mutha, Practicing Advocate at Bombay High Court.

    “In today’s legal environment, being a litigator is not just about knowing the  law but it is about being responsive, reading people, handling pressure and  adapting quickly.” – Reshma Mutha, Practicing Advocate at Bombay High Court.

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

    In the initial phase of your career, you worked with various lawyers  and practiced in areas like MCOCA, PMLA, PITA, DV Act, PCA, etc.  What has been one of the most endearing experiences from that time? 

    One of the most endearing experiences from the early phase of  my career was witnessing the practical application of legal principles in  complex cases like MCOCA, NDPS, PCA, PMLA, etc. where  constitutional safeguards and procedural nuances played a crucial role. I  distinctly recall filing and handling a writ petition for a minor girl, Sakshi challenging the denial of her admission to FYJC (First Year Junior College)  under the HSC Board despite her selection on merit through the First  Come-First-Served (FCFS) round of the online admission process for the  academic year 2019–2020. Sakshi had been allotted a seat in the reputed  institution of the city, Mithibai College, Mumbai, but was arbitrarily denied  admission despite vacancies. After the Hon’ble Bombay High Court  stepped in, Sakshi got admission in Mithibai College, Mumbai, based on  her merit. The Court’s decision made sure that she received the education which she deserved and was treated fairly. This matter marked my first independent appearance, wherein I undertook the drafting of the petition,  completed the filing process and conducted the arguments before the Court  and ultimately secured a favourable order for the minor girl, ensuring  justice was served. The learning process was challenging, but those early  years built the foundation for my independent practice and taught me to  appreciate both the complexity of law and its real impact on people’s lives.

    Coming from a B.Sc. background, what made you choose law as a  career? How has your B.Sc. degree helped you in the legal landscape? 

    Though I pursued B.Sc. out of academic interest, my growing curiosity about social systems, justice, and access to rights gradually pulled  me toward the field of law. During my undergraduate years, I became  aware of the lack of legal awareness in everyday life, especially among  women and marginalized communities. Motivated by this, I had filed a few RTI applications seeking information on public issues for instance, the  persistent problem of non-functional street lights around our girls’ hostel  area, drainage issue, etc. and these small steps that gave me a sense of law’s  power to create transparency and accountability. These experiences shaped  my decision to take up law not just as a career, but as a means to contribute  meaningfully to society. That is when it hit me that law could be a  powerful tool for change. My science background has actually helped a lot.  It trained me to think clearly, work methodically and solve problems step  by step. This approach really comes in handy when dealing with complex  legal issues, especially in white-collar crimes and statutory offences with  precision, clarity, and a structured mindset. 

    What motivated you to establish your own practice after gaining  significant experience with various lawyers? Were there any hurdles  you faced, and how did you navigate them? 

    After a few years of working with experienced lawyers, I reached  a point where I wanted to build a practice that reflected my personal values like empathy, integrity, and client-centric advocacy. The desire for doing  something on my own and deeper involvement in each case naturally led  me toward independent practice.

    Being a first-generation lawyer, living in a city like Mumbai, away from  home, the journey was not easy. Building client trust, managing court  appearances alone, and handling all the administrative aspects of running  a practice were significant challenges. Yet, with time, I started getting good at matters and the real reward was the satisfaction of helping someone get  justice which made every effort worthwhile. 

    The biggest hurdle came during the Covid-19 pandemic. Just as I had  started practicing independently, the nationwide lockdown brought  everything to a halt, especially in Mumbai. It felt like starting all over  again. But with patience, hard work, and the trust of my clients and family, I slowly rebuilt my practice from scratch. Consistency, strong networks,  and a growing support system helped me bounce back. That phase tested  my patience and resilience, but ultimately strengthened my commitment to  the profession. 

    What has been one of the most interesting or challenging cases you’ve  encountered so far, and how do you prepare for such a matter? 

    One of the most challenging cases I have handled was a bail  application in a double murder case which I have argued before the  Bombay High Court and secured bail (BA/2666/2021). The gravity of the  offence under Section 302 IPC meant I had to be extremely thorough. I  spent a lot of time going through the FIR, charge sheet, forensic reports  and witness statements and every detail mattered. 

    In such sensitive or complex matters, I have learned that preparation is not just about reading the case file. It is about thinking a few steps ahead. I try  to anticipate what the other side might argue, apply my mind to the facts  and legal issues and dive into relevant laws and precedents that can support the case. I also spend time planning how I will present the matter in court, not just what to say, but how to say it clearly and confidently. 

    At the same time, I make it a point to understand the client’s background  and the full story behind the case. Knowing their situation, emotions and  what is at stake helps me build a stronger, more grounded argument. After  all, law is not just about rules, it is about people. That human side really  matters in how you approach a case. 

    While dealing with various Criminal Law, Constitutional Remedies,  and White-Collar Crimes over the years, what are some of the common  issues you frequently encounter in criminal law cases? 

    One of the most common issues I have come across, especially  in criminal law, is procedural lapses. Whether it is a delay in filing the FIR,  improper collection of evidence from the crime scene, recording statements  of the witnesses, non-compliance with mandatory provisions like Section  41A of Cr.P.C., these lapses often become crucial in bail arguments and  trial strategy. 

    Another recurring challenge is the lack of awareness, both among accused  persons and complainants, about their rights, laws of the country and legal  remedies. Many clients approach us after having already made statements  without legal assistance, or worse, not understanding the implications of  their actions. 

    In white-collar crime cases, what stands out is the volume and complexity  of documentation. These matters require not just legal knowledge but a strong grip over financial data, transaction trails, statutory compliance and  application of mind. Misunderstandings often arise due to overlaps  between civil and criminal liability, and part of our job becomes explaining the legal position in simple terms, both to clients and, at times, even to  investigating officers. 

    What really helps is a combination of legal preparation and practical  insight, understanding the ground realities, staying updated with the law  and evolving jurisprudence and maintaining clear, consistent  communication with clients at every stage. 

    When handling highly sensitive matters, especially those involving  social evils like atrocities against women, how do you manage both the  procedural aspects and the emotional sensitivity of the case? How does  this affect your personal stress and mental health? 

    Cases involving atrocities against women are some of the most  emotionally intense and legally demanding matters I handle. On one hand,  you have strict procedural timelines like filing complaints before appropriate authorities, ensuring protection, custody and maintenance 

    orders, gathering evidence and on the other hand, you are dealing with  someone’s trauma, fear and often a complete breakdown of trust in the  system. 

    What I have learned is that you have to create space for both. I approach  the procedural side with precision, ensuring that no technical lapse  weakens the case. At the same time, I spend time building a rapport with  the client, making them feel heard and safe, explaining to them about their  rights and legal remedies available to them. Sometimes that means just  being present and not rushing the conversation. Trust plays a huge role in  such matters. 

    Emotionally, these cases do take a toll. It is hard to stay completely  detached when you are witnessing the real impact on someone’s life right in front of you. I have had moments of helplessness, especially when  systemic delays frustrate the client. To manage the stress, I try to set  boundaries after work hours, talk to family members and peers who  understand the space and stay grounded in the thought that I am doing my best, I can within the framework of the law. 

    Over time, I have realized that empathy does not weaken your professional  edge and rather it strengthens your advocacy, especially in cases where  legal issues are closely connected to real-life experiences. 

    You played a pivotal role in a case where the Bombay High Court  ordered a re-investigation into a fatal road accident after four years.  What were the key legal and strategic challenges in convincing the  Court to reopen the case, and how did this decision impact the victim’s  family and the broader discourse on delayed justice? 

    Yes, this was a deeply emotional and legally challenging case for  me. The biggest hurdle was that the case had already been closed with the  deceased, my client’s son who was wrongly named as the sole accused in  the FIR and chargesheet. It had been more than four years since the  accident, and no steps were taken by the police to trace the actual offender  viz. a 10-wheeler container truck driver that had caused the accident and  fled the scene. 

    The turning point for me was gathering and presenting strong evidence, particularly CCTV footage of the accident spot from which the  involvement and negligence of the truck driver could be established.  Strategically, I had to convince the Court that the original investigation was  not only flawed but had caused additional trauma to a grieving mother who was fighting to clear her deceased son’s name from the FIR and  chargesheet. 

    The Hon’ble Bombay High Court ordered a fresh investigation which led  to correction of procedural errors and ultimately, the withdrawal of all  baseless allegations against the deceased. This decision brought long awaited closure and dignity to the victim’s family. More importantly, it  reinforced the judiciary’s role in correcting institutional lapses and revived  public confidence in the justice delivery system. It was not just a legal win  but it was personal justice. More broadly, this case sends a strong message  that even delayed justice is not denied justice. 

    What guidance would you offer to law students and aspiring litigators  hoping to chart a path like yours? Is there a particular mindset, skill  set, or approach you believe is essential in today’s dynamic legal  environment? 

    The first thing I would say is, there is no fixed formula for  success in litigation. My path will be different from yours, and that is  completely normal. What really makes a difference is sticking with it,  being patient, staying consistent, and showing up every day, even when it  feels like nothing is happening. That is when growth is quietly taking place. 

    In today’s legal environment, being a litigator is not just about knowing the  law but it is about being responsive, reading people, handling pressure and  adapting quickly. So, while courtroom exposure is important, equally important is the ability to listen carefully, communicate clearly and write  persuasively. Even a well-drafted writ petition can set you apart. 

    One thing I always recommend to students is, utilise your time by doing internships with diverse lawyers, trial court practitioners, senior counsels, NGOs. Observe how they work, not just what they say in court. These early  learnings will shape how you think and practice later. 

    And finally, believe in the long game. Litigation takes time. You may have  to wait to argue your first matter or sign your first client. But if you are honest with your work, keep learning and stay grounded, opportunities do  come. 

    Balancing professional commitments with impactful social  engagements is no small feat. As General Secretary (Co-incharge of  Nashik Region & Women Advocates’ Cell) with the MPCC, while also  actively delivering legal awareness sessions and mentoring young law  students, how do you manage your time and maintain personal well being amidst such a dynamic schedule? 

    Honestly, it is a constant balancing act and I am still learning!  What helps me the most is planning and setting clear priorities. I make sure  to block time in my week for legal work, social initiatives, student  mentoring etc.  

    But I have also learned that it is okay to say no sometimes. I used to feel  guilty about turning down opportunities, but now, I remind myself that  quality matters more than quantity, whether it is in court or during any activity. 

    To manage personal well-being, I try to find small moments in life like  taking a walk, going for a trek, grabbing a cup of tea with colleagues, or  just switching off from screens for a bit. It really helps. I also lean on my  support system – my family, friends and even co-workers who keep me  grounded and remind me to pause and recharge when things get hectic. 

    It is busy, yes, but when you truly care about both your profession and your  interest, you somehow find the rhythm that works for you.

    Get in touch with Reshma Mutha –

  • “All lawyers are Super lawyers; thus no single lawyer is a Super lawyer.” – Ankit Rastogi, Partner at Mason & Associates.

    “All lawyers are Super lawyers; thus no single lawyer is a Super lawyer.” – Ankit Rastogi, Partner at Mason & Associates.

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

    What drew you towards the field of Intellectual Property law, and what were some of the early experiences that helped lay the foundation for your practice in this domain?

    First of all, thank you for connecting with me to share my story. I was quite intrigued by the name of the platform ‘Super Lawyer’. This reminded me of the film ‘The Incredibles’ wherein a character Syndrome says that if all humans will have super powers, none will be a Super hero. Similarly, in my view since all lawyers are Super lawyers, thus no single lawyer is a Super lawyer. Now coming to your question: 

    I think my interest in Cinema. I was initially drawn towards Intellectual Property as a practice area since I had a lot of interest in movies. I was highly inclined towards Copyright Law, since I wanted to understand how the film industry functions. 

    As far as early experience that helped me lay the foundation in this domain are concerned, the first litigation matter that I worked upon was a passing off suit. In that suit, over a period of time after filing the suit, Defendant had obtained registration of its trade mark and moved an application for amendment of written statement to plead its registration. At that stage, when I was too young (barely a month into the practice) I thought that the Plaintiff’s case was over since the Defendant had obtained a trade mark registration. At that stage, my then senior told me that registration of Defendant’s mark is of no consequence in a suit for passing off, which is maintainable even against a registered proprietor. He further asked me to read N.R. Dongre and Ors. vs. Whirlpool Corpn. and Anr.; 1996 PTC (16) 583 (SC) wherein apex Court upheld this position arrived at by Single Judge and Division bench of the High Court. 

    You argued a landmark case where the Delhi High Court, for the first time, ruled on the registrability of geographical names as arbitrary trademarks. Could you share your insights from the case that shaped the Court’s reasoning, and what do you believe are the broader implications of this decision?

    To be really honest, I don’t know as to whether it was a landmark decision or not.  However, Siddharth Suri vs Registrar of Trade Marks does give a guiding light for registration of geographical names as trade marks where the geographical name has been applied arbitrarily to the goods. In this case, the goods were ‘Leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and not included in other classes; animal skins, hides, trunks and travelling bags; umbrellas, parasols and walking sticks; whips, harness and saddlery’ for which ‘Andamen’ was not found to be having a goods-place association. Accordingly, the objection under Section 9(1)(b) that the trade mark designates geographical origin was not found to be attracted since Andamen (whether said to be taken from Andaman Sea or from the Andaman & Nicobar Islands) does not have a reputation for goods falling in Class 18. 

    The broader implications of the decision are that when one comes across a geographical name as a trade mark, they should not disregard its protection/registration just because it is a geographical name but analyze whether that geographical area has an association or reputation for goods for which it is sought to be registered/protected.  

    You advise clients across diverse sectors including FMCG, pharmaceuticals, liquor, book publishing, and e-commerce. Given the rapid growth of the pharmaceutical industry, what are some of the major legal and compliance challenges entities face in this space?

    I think as far as the pharmaceutical industry is concerned, the biggest challenge has been counterfeit products. For a consumer, who may consume these counterfeit products; disaster always lurks around the corner to make its presence felt. In other terms, the consumers are extremely vulnerable to life threatening consequences. I have, in the past, worked on multiple matters, both civil and criminal, where the Defendants/Accused produced identical drugs and it is not possible to identify the fake unless you get inputs from the team who worked on the packaging and in some cases research. The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most regulated industries; since it has to cater to safety and efficacy. Keeping this in mind, it obviously has to comply with safety and cleanliness standards, good manufacturing practices, disclosure of information and that too in line with labelling requirements. The major problem in the industry is fake drug racket, which may or may not be related to any Intellectual property and could be a completely new mark, where the ingredients told on the label will not even be present in the drug and the drug would have been sold or supplied clandestinely with no regulatory approval at all. 

    As a Partner, staying ahead of the curve is crucial. In your view, how effective have the current government initiatives been in streamlining the IP registration process? What further improvements in your opinion can be made?

    In recent times, I could think of four initiatives done at the level of the Intellectual Property office which are commendable. First, is the possibility of search of device trade marks, which has been facilitated online by the IP office. The added advantage of this feature is that depending on the device/image the tool also suggests the possible Vienna Code Classifications; which also aids in saving time.  

    Second, is the enablement of a queue system for various functions and displaying it online; a real time check for hearing, review applications and examination status; which enables an entity to know as to where it marks stands in the list of hearings before the trade marks office.  

    Third is the Open house sessions, the IP office does with applicants and stakeholders everyday from 4.30 PM to 5.30 PM virtually to address grievances or take suggestions on any issue related to Intellectual Property Rights. 

    Last is the ‘Notifications/Reminders’ feature on the e-filing page and the ‘Reminders’ feature on the E-Register Page; which enables one to see latest updates on their portfolio of applications, ensuring that no important update is missed. This saves a tremendous amount of time.  

    In my view, to ensure a smooth registration process; the first thing that should be incorporated is consistency and standard operating procedures; so that every applicant or stakeholder has a clear idea of the chance of their application getting accepted or rejected.

    You’ve worked on intermediary liability matters. How do you assess the evolving legal framework around platform accountability, especially in light of recent judicial decisions and amendments to the IT Rules? What are the core challenges in striking a balance between free expression and regulatory obligations?

    I think the intention is always to balance; that’s what in my view, any legislature or government exercising its legislative powers under the IT Act, 2000 looks at while keeping in mind the protection of the people and at the same time working out the economics. So, that’s the word. BALANCE!! – the evolving legal framework in the IT Rules, especially The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [hereinafter ‘IT Rules, 2021’] indicates a tide towards control but the intent of that control is Balance; The amendments to the same in 2022 required the intermediary to make reasonable efforts so that content which is covered under Rule 3(1)(b) is, inter alia, not displayed on its platform. The intention is some sort of action; but the rule making body steers clear of indicating what sort of action (no pointers whatsoever) and leaves it as a subject of interpretation.  However, what are these ‘reasonable efforts’ or what could be some examples of these ‘reasonable efforts’; for that we get an indication from judicial decisions such as the recent decision in Indiamart Intermesh Ltd. v. Puma SE; 2025: DHC:4819-DB which indicates that one of the reasonable efforts for a platform could be that each of the sellers is aware of the requirement to not display counterfeit products and to ensure that they furnish an express undertaking to the said effect to the intermediary.  Apart from this, on reading of paragraph 92 of the decision, I think another indication of reasonable effort could also be not to re-list the same seller in respect of the same products whose listings have been taken down earlier. 

    As far as 2023 amendments are concerned; they appear to have been done majorly to have the online gaming intermediaries under a stricter control (as compared to intermediaries) , especially those online gaming intermediaries who enable the users to access any permissible online real money. A lot of compliance requirements under ‘IT Rules, 2021’ which were only applicable to a significant social media intermediary originally have been extended to online gaming intermediaries as well by virtue of the amendments done in the year 2023. 

    As far as your last question, I think the standard of morality/scandalous statements keeps shifting with every generation. The biggest challenge I believe is ‘viewpoint bias’ and the evolving nature of the society we live in. Thus, in my opinion there will always be shifting standards and that’s why this area of law will always be dynamic and never ending. In simpler terms, what may be kosher for one; may be outrageous for another and this will be perennial. So, it is extremely difficult to maintain that balance between free expression and regulatory obligations. 

    With such an enriching and diverse career, what initially inspired you to pursue law? What advice would you offer to law students and young professionals aspiring to build a career in Intellectual Property and litigation?

    I am an extremely lazy person when it comes to doing things for myself. I try to take the most convenient and easy route to navigate life choices. So, resultantly, the decision to pursue law was the length of the programme; five years. No worry after school for another five years. I thought in the beginning of the law school that may be after these five years; I will know what I need to do. However, post five years, I just went with the flow. In hindsight, I think I should not have done law. I could have explored a creative vocation where my thoughts could be disseminated freely (Obviously, subject to reasonable restrictions in Article 19).

    One of my advice to every aspiring professional in the field of Intellectual Property would be to be tech-savvy. To understand how content is being created these days. What are the terms of the AI platforms, which are used by us for content creation. Further, I would also recommend not to restrict their understanding of jurisprudence on intellectual property to India but analyze what is going on globally. In this decade already we are dealing with landmark decisions on intellectual property issues intertwined with technology utilised across platforms which have shown us issues which we could not have probably envisaged a few decades ago. Look at the issue that is challenging the use of content by AI platforms, ‘keyword advertising’, use of a mark in drop down menu at the back end to trigger a listing if one searches for those products on a platform, violations by virtue of deepfake technology etc. I mean, mirror websites and duping in the name of fraud schemes of investment or employment across the internet, fake domain names, domain name disputes are something that have become traditional violations of Intellectual Property and orders granting real-time injunctions are not being passed only in isolated cases.  

    So far as litigation is concerned, my advice has always been to be diligent and understand the background and the possible solutions through procedural laws. Litigation is not a predictable game; there are variables across stages in a matter – from inception to trial; from an ex-parte order till consequent appeals. One has to make a strategy giving all possible variables due weight. 

    Managing a demanding legal practice comes with its own pressures. How do you maintain a healthy work-life balance, and is there a personal philosophy or guiding principle that has helped you navigate your professional journey?

    To be really honest, I am unable to maintain a healthy work-life balance. Unfortunately, my matters, the ongoing developments in the fraternity, the need for being constantly updated & networking does not allow me to shut down/switch off. While my office is five (5) days working, the only time I think I am able to be completely at peace is when I sleep or I read. I read a lot, and have also in this process edited a few comic books. These are my only escapes apart from occasional films in theatres or at home. A lot of professionals, who might be really busy may say that they spend time with their families; switch off on weekends etc. Kudos to them!! I am never able to shut down. There is a constant barrage of thoughts in my head unless I am sleeping, reading or watching anything. I am constantly thinking of what needs to be done, are we on top of all our matters, has the team done all the compliances etc. There is a constant urge to ensure everything is under control and all bases are covered. This leads me to not have a work-life balance. 

    The only guiding principle that has helped me to navigate my professional journey is sincerity and time management. One has to prepare as much as they could for a matter while giving other matters also their due importance. One has to give every advice keeping all the ethical considerations in mind. I try my best every day to do and pull off a lot, sometimes much more than I actually can. Sometimes I succeed; sometimes I don’t. On days I succeed, I stay calm and think something constructive has been achieved. On the remaining days, I am just too hard on myself. 

    Get in touch with Ankit Rastogi –

  • “To foster a stronger IP culture, we must empower founders with foundational IP knowledge, which shall help them to identify their IP assets.” – Sonali Sawant, Founding Partner Projulex Global.

    “To foster a stronger IP culture, we must empower founders with foundational IP knowledge, which shall help them to identify their IP assets.” – Sonali Sawant, Founding Partner Projulex Global.

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

    Your journey reflects remarkable versatility and determination. Looking back, what pivotal decisions do you believe have contributed most to your practice over the years?

    My journey into law, and specifically as an IP Attorney, was far from a linear path. Unlike many, I never initially aimed to be a lawyer; in fact, the term “IP Attorney” was completely foreign to me until my second year of law school when IP was first introduced as a subject.

    Coming from a humble, rural background in Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, my early academic pursuits were remarkably diverse. I chose arts at Ferguson College, majored in Psychology for my B.A., and even dedicated time to learning and tutoring German language while preparing for Nritya Visharad, harbouring aspirations of becoming a classical dancer, psychologist, or German translator. Law was never on my radar.

    However, destiny, as they say, had other plans. Being a first-generation lawyer in the family, unaware of the fascinating journey ahead, I took a significant leap of faith. I applied to only one institution, ILS Law College. Getting selected in the first list felt incredibly lucky, as it was a high-risk gamble with no Plan B – a rejection would have meant a wasted year. Although I later transferred to Shankarrao Chavan Law College in my second year, this initial entry into the legal field was itself a pivotal decision.

    This unconventional start , directly led to numerous vital career breaks, opportunities, and challenges. The journey itself broadened my horizons, exposing me to diverse people, institutions, experiences, and ideologies. These early experiences undoubtedly instilled in me resilience, an openness to new directions, and a unique interdisciplinary perspective. I truly believe these qualities laid the foundation for my enriching legal practice and have profoundly shaped who I am today.

    What motivated you to pursue a Master’s degree in Science and Technology Law? Why did you choose this particular specialization, and how has it influenced your practice?

    My decision to pursue a Master’s degree in Science and Technology Law was a pivotal moment in my journey. The dynamic and evolving nature of science and technology, encompassing fascinating areas like Intellectual Property, Biotechnology Law, Cyber Law, and Health Law, deeply intrigued me. This particular specialization, offered by the Department of Law at Savitribai Phule Pune University, provided a holistic overview of the actual laws in place, regulations, and pending bills in these fields.

    The one-year LL.M. program was instrumental in cultivating strong research, presentation, and public speaking skills. While Intellectual Property (IP) was my primary focus, this course provided a robust theoretical foundation in IP, which was crucial for my understanding, research, and practice in IP law. I am particularly grateful to my professors, Dr. Jyoti Bhakare Ma’am and the late T.S.N. Shastry Sir, for fostering my interest in research. The affinity for research I developed during my LL.M. studies remains a cornerstone of my practice today. Beyond academics, the program also allowed me to forge valuable connections and a supportive network that continues to be a source of shared knowledge and care.

    In the early phase of your career, what experiences or cases helped solidify your interest and expertise in intellectual property law, ultimately leading you to build a career in this domain?

    So, from administrative and accounting roles during my LL.B. to becoming a Trademark Associate, visiting faculty, researcher, and ultimately leading my own law firm, every step has been instrumental in building my network, professionalism, knowledge, and interpersonal skills. The one constant thread woven through all these experiences has been Intellectual Property.

    A particularly pivotal moment occurred during my third year of LL.B., when I was working in an administrative capacity. However, my main work was to recover pending invoices from clients. For the first time I was tasked with coordinating copyright filings for a corporate client. As I wasn’t yet a qualified lawyer, the initial plan was to outsource this work. However, being new to the field with no prior legal experience or strong professional connections, I struggled to find a trustworthy attorney online, causing a delay in the assignment. Instead of waiting, I took the initiative. Under the guidance of my senior, I decided to undertake the assignment myself. Successfully completing it single-handedly, by the time the registrations were finalized, I had not only gained valuable IP experience, but this experience provided the initial boost of confidence I needed to delve deeper into IP. 

    At that time, I even found myself daydreaming about having my own law office and all the “corporate fancy things,” largely inspired by series like “SUITS.” From that point forward, the more I immersed myself in this field, the more opportunities I seized. Another impactful experience that solidified my global perspective was assisting foreign attorneys with trademark infringement matters in SAARC countries. Additionally, I had the opportunity to introduce new perspectives to the firm’s trademark practice, which led to a drastic increase in their filings. This invaluable exposure allowed me to read, understand, and apply IP laws in various foreign jurisdictions, especially within Asian countries, further cementing my dedication to this domain.

    After working with prominent law firms, what inspired you to branch out and establish your own practice? What were some of the major challenges you faced during this transition, and how did you navigate them?

    Establishing my own practice and ultimately my own office was always a core aspiration. While working with Ex- law firms, I actively immersed myself in client counselling, meetings, networking, and client acquisition, eventually realizing I excelled in these areas. By the time I decided to make the leap, I felt confident in my ability to navigate the challenges that lay ahead.

    The opportune moment arrived post-COVID-19, amidst a global surge in entrepreneurial spirit. I decided to take the plunge, giving myself a pragmatic six-month window to explore the market. This time, I had a well-thought-out Plan B, given my increased responsibilities. I am incredibly satisfied, happy, and grateful for the overwhelming positive response and trust I received not only from my professional network but also from my husband. What began as an individual practice has since grown into an LLP, offering a diverse range of services beyond IP, including Data Protection, Privacy Laws, Cyber Laws, Entertainment Laws, Legal Metrology, POSH, Litigation, and General Corporate matters. My portfolio expanded organically, driven by my clients’ evolving needs.

    A unique challenge emerged during this transition, one that I found both amusing and concerning. I received calls, on multiple occasions, demanding justification for starting my individual practice. These calls explicitly instructed me not to approach former firms’ clients or even to redirect any clients who might approach me in my individual capacity. Such demands from senior industry figures were not only illogical but also fundamentally unacceptable. Indeed, it felt like an attempt to threaten, suppress, and dominate me. But, this act inadvertently bolstered my confidence, affirming that I was on the right track and destined for something significant. 

    My belief has always been, “There are plenty of fish in the sea; go and catch yours.” I am immensely proud to state that my first 50 clients were acquired purely through my own efforts and network, not by “stealing” or personally soliciting from any previous firm. This is a point I’ve rarely discussed publicly, known only to my closest friends. Naturally, I chose to ignore those unwarranted demands, focusing instead on testing and implementing my own ideas. I am proud to say that I have never had to proactively solicit work from clients. Instead, my clients, friends, family, my husband, and my business partner have organically become my most effective brand ambassadors. 

    You’ve worked on over 3000 trademark applications across jurisdictions. Could you share a particularly complex or memorable case that left a lasting impact on you professionally?

    Yes, indeed. Each and every case and application has its own unique journey with its challenges and surprises. One particularly memorable case that left a lasting impact on me professionally involved a situation where the infringers were, surprisingly, a group of my client’s own students. They had copied my client’s domain name with deceptively similar words and spellings, leading to clear trademark infringement and cyber-squatting.

    The complexity arose from the existing relationship between my client and these individuals. A direct legal enforcement action, while legally justifiable, would have severely damaged those relations. Therefore, my approach had to be non-conventional. Instead of issuing a formal legal notice, we had to very politely communicate with them, explaining the legal implications and amicably requesting them to take down the domain name and refrain from future use.

    This case was a significant learning experience for me. It taught me that legal solutions aren’t always black and white, and understanding the human element can lead to a far more satisfactory and sustainable outcome for all parties involved.

    As a Trademark Facilitator and mentor under the Start-up India initiative, how would you assess the current level of IP awareness among Indian startups? What more can be done to foster a stronger culture of IP protection in the startup ecosystem?

    As a Trademark Facilitator and mentor under the Start-up India initiative, I’ve seen India’s startup ecosystem flourish since 2015. While many startups are aware of IP’s existence, there’s a significant lack of strategic understanding in approaching IP registrations. Even after a decade of Start-up India Scheme, very few startups genuinely prioritize and secure their IPs seriously. Those who do are consistently at the forefront of the market, proving the competitive edge IP offers.

    To foster a stronger IP culture, we must empower founders with foundational IP knowledge, which shall help them to identify their IP assets. Also, this would prevent them from being misled and enable them to proactively integrate IP protection into their business strategy, which is crucial for long-term success. 

    You’ve presented research and spoken at international conferences in Singapore and China. How have these global engagements shaped your professional outlook and influenced your long-term vision?

    My global engagements, especially the ARCIALA research conference in Singapore and fellowship in China, profoundly shaped my professional outlook. Initially seeking research opportunities in IP, these experiences offered me an invaluable global perspective from diverse international researchers. They provided strong connections and significantly deepened my understanding of the subject. This exposure solidified my long-term vision to practice IP with a broader, more interconnected view, constantly seeking to understand and adapt to the evolving international IP landscape.

    Your extensive work across SAARC, GCC countries, and through the Madrid Protocol gives you a unique global perspective. What are some key considerations Indian IP practitioners should keep in mind while managing international trademark portfolios?

    Having the opportunity to work on various international trademark assignments, definitely it becomes very important for us as Trademark Attorneys to go beyond eye on details, deadlines and trademark filing requirements of a particular country. It’s crucial to grasp the technical nuances of each country’s trademark law, such as “first-to-use” versus “first-to-file” systems, and ensure the mark is morally and culturally acceptable in that specific region. Thorough due diligence, understanding local language requirements, knowing the protection period, establishing strong connections with foreign attorneys, and being prepared for diverse enforcement procedures are all vital. This comprehensive approach is essential for effective global trademark management. 

    In addition to your legal practice, you’ve been a visiting lecturer for nearly seven years, work with an NGO, and have co-authored a book. How do you balance your professional responsibilities with these meaningful pursuits, and what drives you to stay engaged on so many fronts?

    Balancing my legal practice with lecturing, NGO work as a POSH committee member, and co-authoring a book comes down to strategic time management and prioritizing urgency. I initially took lecturing roles outside office hours, and now, with a diverse practice, I focus on shorter courses and sessions. Co-authoring was part of a job role, yet it significantly advanced my research direction, while NGO work is primarily “as required on site” role. 

    So, the support and belief of the good people around me drives me across these varied engagements, which keeps me motivated and energized!

    Get in touch with Sonali Sawant –

  • “Growth is inevitable and so is learning, any point of saturation leads you to level up.” – Ritu Agwekar, Founder of JURISEYE, Partners.

    “Growth is inevitable and so is learning, any point of saturation leads you to level up.” – Ritu Agwekar, Founder of JURISEYE, Partners.

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

    With a career spanning over two decades and expertise in Real Estate, General Corporate, and Commercial Transactions, what were some of the early experiences or influences that drew you to these specific areas of law?

    Early years in Practice are experimental, one has to be open to everything, each work adds value to your knowledge, it is like experimenting with your own skill set, it is only with years that your client decides what you are good at, so I guess the choice is more about getting your skills to explore everything rather than being selective in the early years. And as you go through handling transactions, each being its own type, over the years, you realise that every transaction has that one element which is different, and there lies the experience, which gradually grows through such handling and conclusions of transactions, it’s a process and there’s no short cut to it.

    You began your academic journey with a degree in B.Com. What led you to pursue law afterward and was it a deliberate choice or something that evolved over time?

    My career chose me, I guess. I was always meant to be here. In fact, I also cleared my ICWA, Group III and CS, Group I, but ultimately my passion for Law was stronger. I was inclined to do something which had an element of variety in its execution and detailing and Law, has a wide range of skill sets to choose from, here there is no limit to the learning or stopping from being variant and practicing the streams that one intends to, one can be practicing various domains simultaneously, too.

    Having worked with prominent law firms and institutions, what inspired your transition to establishing an independent practice? What were some of the turning points that shaped this decision?

    Growth is inevitable and so is learning, any point of saturation leads you to level up. That is the only constant. One always wishes to have an independent set up, not for enjoying freedom but also for being able to take up newer areas of expertise, grow. The Covid times, made start up advisory and POSH Practice my added areas of legal services, that was the time that I started rendering legal services and complete legal handholding to start-ups, MSMEs and handled their entire contract cycle. I guess it’s always about learning and as a Professional that should be one’s priority.

    You’ve handled a wide range of real estate transactions. In your experience, what are some of the major legal challenges that often arise during due diligence in the real estate sector?

    Real Estate Practice is one of the most challenging practice areas, because of the wide range of enactments in force, gazettes and regulations, with plethora of enactments, due diligence for specific land types, tenures as also proximity to certain sensitive areas and coastal areas, personal laws, etc makes it an extensive area of practice. Out of the many transactions that I have been a part of and handled, one such was while being a part of a 50acre acquisition, it had multiple enactment permissions, sanctions and permissions, under various Acts, prior to my client being able to buy it, it was for a German Company. One of the most exciting acquisitions.

    Your work with startups, SEZ developers, and major infrastructure companies. When dealing with SEZs in particular, how do you adapt your legal strategy? What makes the legal landscape involving SEZs distinct from others?

    Start up and SEZ are two distinct set ups, calling for totally different approach. While for a start-up it is important to understand their vision statement to be able to legally handhold them, for a SEZ it’s the scale of acquisition, permissions involved. A start up may still be naïve to hiring a Lawyer yesterday, a SEZ has it all along. While SEZ is about scale, a Start up is about measure. Law remains the bottom line for both, the scale differs. As I mentioned practicing law means gauging the requirement, while start up may just require contracts, IP to be its first choice of legal expertise SEZ calls for enumerable sanctions, due diligence, permissions, contracts, Definitive documents and may more to even begin with. 

    You’ve played an active role in promoting POSH compliance and workplace inclusion. In your view, how is the legal framework in India evolving to support safer, more equitable work environments?

    Yes, as I mentioned I started my POSH practice in the year 2019 and it was a turning point in understanding how an organisation can be ignorant about an employee being mentally harassed (sexually). It has been 2013 since the enactment came in force, but the way things have evolved in view of the present workplace and the diversity of the workforce, calls for a different perception of how we would now interpret the enactment, more gender neutral. But by and large it’s the women who need to be safeguarded against the harassment and we have to focus and emphasize more on gender sensitization and education. The practice in POSH is a challenging area of practice, which calls for proper interpretation of law, policies of an organisation and understanding the human aspect of the practice, too. There still needs to be a lot of work to be done in the domain and I personally feel, the real achievement lies in not requiring any Law to tell people how to behave/act with one another. It’s about being able to strike a chord between a healthy and mutually dependable, respectful and growth oriented work environment for all.

    With the Data Protection and Digital Privacy Act (DPDPD) gaining prominence, how ready do you believe Indian businesses are to meet compliance requirements? What specific impact does this have in sectors like real estate?

    Absolutely ignorant is how I would view it as, as of now. With we still awaiting the Rules to be framed, I guess it’s still a wait and watch scenario with most. Though there is awareness about something, it’s not clear as to how much detrimental it can be, if non-complied with, and that’s a huge gap that we as Professionals, working in this domain, have to fill.

    You’ve received several accolades for your work. What key advice would you offer to aspiring legal professionals particularly those looking to build a corporate practice?

    Law is the profession for the patient players, you cannot rush to success in this field, it’s about Perseverance and constant Learning, here it is about knowledge first. One important thing is never compare your success with any measuring tape, accolades, awards, included. Success means to each its own and thus does not have any set yardstick of measurement. Focus on your journey, upgrading, learning and do everything with a lot of passion and involvement, nothing is Magic, it takes time to shape up and show results. Patience is the key. There are wide choices in todays times and one can pick and choose that one intends to and stay focussed on building that. But, levelling and upgrading is a must. Law is an ever growing field and a need for all, so learning is absolutely inevitable, I know it all attitude, may not work.

     With such a diverse and dynamic legal portfolio, what drives your passion for the law each day? What has sustained this motivation and commitment over the years?

    Your question has the answer- PASSION and I would value Discipline more than Motivation, Consistency above Perfection, its ones constant effort and dedication that keeps you going, every day.

    Get in touch with Ritu Agwekar –

  • What an Engineering Mind Brings to the Legal World: Navigating Law in the U.S., EU & Beyond – Punit Gaur, Corporate Legal Advisor.

    What an Engineering Mind Brings to the Legal World: Navigating Law in the U.S., EU & Beyond – Punit Gaur, Corporate Legal Advisor.

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

    What inspired your shift from an engineering background to a career in law? How has your technical foundation influenced your legal practice, particularly in areas like technology contracts or regulatory compliance?

    Since my B.tech college days I always believed in learning new things whenever possible.  So, I never considered it as a shift but saw it as upskilling myself through the field of law and with time utilizing my learning from both professional degrees to provide good quality services to my clients. Because of my tech foundation I built strong problem-solving skills, learned to look at something from multiple perspectives. Also, it helps me to bridge the legal and tech communication in a better manner. I am able to ask the right questions from clients to understand their requirements. This helps me to incorporate applicable clauses according to their situation.

    For example, while working with an Australia based software company on a data privacy policy, I noticed they struggled to explain their backend structure in legal terms. Because of my engineering background, I could quickly grasp what their system actually did—how they stored, transferred, and processed user data. I translated that into GDPR-compliant language for their policy. It made the process smoother, faster, and more accurate.

    In the early stages of your legal career, you worked with a range of national and international law firms. What were some formative experiences during this time that helped deepen your understanding of the law and shape your current practice?

    Since my internship days, I got to work in so many different areas of law and I always excitedly said yes! On the litigation side I have worked on a range of cases like cheque dishonour, land acquisition, land compensation cases, high stake arbitrations, industrial disputes, commercial suits, easement cases against Highway authorities, criminal matters, etc. on the Indian side. Also, I worked on employment law cases, probate cases, and personal injury cases in the USA.

    On the corporate law side I have worked on international M&A projects, due diligence work, real estate compliance in USA and India, SaaS contracts, etc.

    The immense experience and learnings that I have received from everyone I have interacted with regarding my work is exceptional. Some taught me how to formulate arguments before district court and how to do it differently before high court, from international clients/firms I understood how legal expectations differ globally, building habit of listening more of what clients want to say to gain clarity and build structure of our thought before we I start working on any legal project. This becomes very important if you have to deliver something that aligns with the client’s purpose.

    A good example that I can think of is about my recent project with a Florida based law firm for drafting employment handbooks. One key learning I took from that experience—and now apply in my own legal practice—is the importance of proactive legal layering. I began building handbooks with layered clauses—clearly identifying what applies universally, what’s state-specific, and where updates may be required as laws evolve. Now, whether I am drafting policies, contracts, or compliance documents, I adopt this layered structure. It not only ensures accuracy but helps clients easily understand and comply with their obligations based on where they operate. This approach also makes future updates more efficient and audit-readiness much stronger. 

    You currently advise businesses across diverse jurisdictions, including the USA, EU, Singapore, and Australia. What are some of the key legal and regulatory differences you encounter, and how do you effectively manage the complexities of cross-border compliance?

    Each jurisdiction has unique laws, cultural considerations, and enforcement mechanisms, requiring tailored strategies. Like in the US, employment is largely at-will but takes all kinds of discrimination very seriously and we have to add a detailed clause for it to cover all kinds of discrimination. 

    In the EU, GDPR is one of the strictest data protection regimes and requires through check in client’s operations to decide whether GDPR applies or not and then draft data protection policy accordingly.

    Singapore is known for its business-friendly environment but has strict anti-money laundering regulations.

    It’s always something new that comes up so you have to stay updated with the laws of the country your client is operating in. For this, I stay connected with local legal experts so I get timely updates and advice if needed for a case. For cross-border legal compliance work, it is better to perform risk assessments to prioritize high risk areas like data privacy in EU, anti-corruption in USA, anti-money laundering law in Singapore etc.

    What are some of the most common pitfalls legal professionals face when negotiating and drafting high-stakes agreements such as SaaS contracts, NDAs, and Master Service Agreements? What strategies do you use to mitigate these risks?

    SaaS, NDA, MSA, are critical to business operations governing IP, service delivery, confidentiality, liability, etc. Errors can lead to financial losses, legal disputes, operations disruptions.

    Pitfall 1: ambiguous terms. For example, not defining scope of services in MSA or not clarifying termination procedure. This can allow a party to avoid its obligations using the cover of ambiguous terms of contract.

    Pitfall 2: neglecting jurisdiction specific regulations such as GDPR in SaaS contracts, minimum wages as per region to be considered before drafting employment contract, which may lead to hefty fines and an invalid contract in some jurisdictions.

    Pitfall 3: not clarifying end goals/purpose of client for drafting this agreement. Client’s intention was to have an easy exit strategy but got stuck for years in litigation due to detailed and inflexible termination clauses. It is very important to understand a client’s business goals before you start drafting any legal document be it a petition or a MSA or any other contract.

    Pitfall 4: inadequate risk allocation- liability for data breaches in SaaS contract, indemnification clauses in MSA, if not specified can expose parties to unforeseen liabilities and long running litigation cases.

    Strategies to mitigate risks:

    1.    Clarity in drafting- using clear, simple and concise language, define the key terms explicitly. I also use schedules and appendices for technical details for SaaS contracts and MSAs.

    2.    Due diligence for regulatory compliance- a thorough due diligence before drafting any contract would be helpful in anticipating risks of non-compliance. Go through laws, rules, regulations, standing orders, or whatever is applicable for your scenario to avoid such risks.

    3.    Draft practical terms: understand the client’s goals and incorporate clauses according to it. For example, in some situations it requires detailed procedure for termination and in some a brief clause would work, you have to use your experience and instincts combined with client’s goals.

    4.    Balance risk allocation: use scenario planning to reduce probability of default by a party and anticipate risk like service failures and data breaches. Definitely have clear indemnification clauses applicable to the scenario. This can only be achieved when you get clarity on what are business goals and purpose to enter such agreements by client. 

    Having incorporated over 10 businesses in the U.S., how do you ensure compliance with federal, state, and local regulations throughout the entity formation process?

    Incorporating so many businesses in the USA has taught me that compliance with all 3 levels of regulations is critical. After I incorporated my first few companies, I prepared a checklist which I follow regularly.

    First and foremost is to understand why the client wants to incorporate in a specific state. Whether it is easy taxation, simple compliance, less fees, quick turnaround, etc.

    Second is to figure out which entity would be the best for the client. Whether an LLC or C-Corp or S-Corp. In some situations, clients are fixed on setting up a C-Corp when clearly it would be better for their business to be an LLC. Have a good discussion with the client so that you convey all relevant points and the client can make an informed decision.

    Do your due diligence once you have answers to 1 and 2nd question. This is important to figure out all compliance documents you might require before incorporating a company. Sometimes business purposes require additional permits or zoning approvals which become relevant to get before you start operating your business.

    Once we have answers to the above 3 questions then I get ready to focus on drafting documents required for the state of incorporation like Articles of incorporation, certificate of incorporation, BOIR (Beneficial ownership information report), EIN SS-4 form, etc.

    Once these documents are ready, we file them before the state either online or by sending them physically through mail or fax.

    Having dealt with various arbitration matters over the years, what do you believe are the advantages or disadvantages of arbitration to traditional court litigation and could you share one of the most interesting arbitrations matters you’ve dealt with?

    In my experience, arbitration offers significant advantages over traditional litigation, especially in commercial disputes. It is faster, more private and allows parties to choose arbitrators with subject matter expertise, this is invaluable in technical or high value matters.

    However, it has its own challenges. Cost can escalate with institutional arbitration; limited appeal rights mean poor awards can’t be easily challenged even if flawed. Another issue is cross border disputes, for example enforcement of a foreign award does become a legal battle of its own, which takes years to decide.

    One of the interesting cases I have dealt with was an arbitration worth 9 cr between a govt institution and a company. The main issue raised by the company was that the govt contracts having unilateral arbitration clauses are invalid. However, after we submitted our evidence and read the arbitration clause along with

    What advice would you give to young professionals aspiring to build a career in international law? Are there specific skills, habits, or resources you believe are crucial for staying current in such a dynamic field?

    For someone like me who has been interested in international legal work since college days, I would recommend giving 2-3 hours daily to build a strong foundation of law and legal work for a jurisdiction you are interested to work in by focusing on research, reading civil/criminal codes, legal templates, etc. There are numerous opportunities in this field, once you start researching and reading more about different areas of law, try finding areas which intrigues you the most like employment law, data privacy, patent law, etc. and then figure out what kind of work is to be done there.

    A lawyer interested in this field must build legal research skills, negotiation skills, strong hold on your focus law, have an open mind, problem solving nature, commercial awareness, be humble and adaptable to fast changing laws.

    If someone is interested to work in this field then certain critical habits are also required like being globally minded i.e., having cultural sensitivity and adaptability to diverse perspective, ready for life long learnings, be comfortable to working odd hours since countries like US, Europe are like 9-12 hours behind so having a quick turnaround time in such odd hours do give you the edge of connecting with right people at right time specially to build trust across geographies, have high ethical standards and respect professional codes of conduct, learn to respect time because it is highly valued in international community. Just an addition though not necessary is to learn French or Spanish if you are interested, it does help if you plan for Europe.

    Regarding resources, join international legal associations like IBA, ICC, YIAG, SIAC, etc. attend various virtual webinars for your topic of interest. You can also follow certain organizations WIPO, UNICTRAL, ILO, etc. because they have provided drafts of laws which most countries follow so there is uniformity and helps build your legal foundation which can be used globally.

    Understand the role of AI but don’t rely on it completely to spoon feed you everything. It will reduce your credibility in the market. It is a friend if you use it right and might become your biggest competitor in the coming future.

    All I can say is persevere and you will reach your goals to work with international clients and law firms.

     Working in a high-stakes, fast-paced legal environment can be demanding. How do you maintain your personal well-being, and what practices help you unwind and recharge outside of work?

    What I can say is having mental clarity about working long hours regularly on odd times and being prepared for it. Consider it as your one-person company, you are working for yourself so define how many hours you are willing to work in a week for your company and be disciplined with it. Though there are days you feel low, drained or lost. So, it is important to have 1-2 persons with positive vibes around you. I meditate regularly (try Silva Method) and try to do at least 3-4 workouts with 1 day focusing on lower back and upper body posture, because you will be sitting for long hours and it definitely helps. Sit with your family, have at least 1 meal together with everyone. Once a week I go to a temple for my spiritual peace and support.

    Other than that I like going on tour to different monuments in Delhi to learn its history and romanticize more with the city I belong to.

    Get in touch with Punit Gaur –

  • “I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals.” – Purvi Mathur, Managing & Co-Founding Partner at KP Associates, Advocates & Consultants.

    “I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals.” – Purvi Mathur, Managing & Co-Founding Partner at KP Associates, Advocates & Consultants.

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

    Looking back at your career and the successful practice you’ve built today, what were the key experiences that initially led you toward pursuing law? What moments or influences made you choose law as a career? Additionally, how did your time at NLU Gujarat shape and deepen your passion for the field?

    I was drawn to law after witnessing how legal complexities often overwhelmed individuals and businesses, creating unnecessary barriers to their goals. A defining moment came during my undergraduate years when I saw a family dispute escalate simply due to lack of proper legal guidance. This showed me that law isn’t just about statutes, but about people and relationships.

    NLU Gujarat was transformative. The practical learning approach, diverse legal exposure through moot courts and internships, and exceptional faculty mentorship developed the critical thinking skills that guide my practice today. The institution’s emphasis on real-world application deepened my understanding of law’s potential to create positive change.

    In the early years of your practice, what experiences helped you build a stronger understanding of the law and laid the foundation for your career? Could you share some key lessons from that period that would benefit our young readers?

    Working across different practice areas initially provided invaluable insights into how various legal disciplines intersect. A pivotal experience was advising a struggling startup on restructuring, which required understanding corporate law, employment regulations, and tax implications simultaneously teaching me that modern legal practice demands interdisciplinary expertise.

    Key lessons for young practitioners: embrace every learning opportunity regardless of how mundane it seems; develop strong communication skills to translate complex legal concepts into actionable business advice; build relationships based on trust and transparency; and stay curious; the law evolves constantly, and successful practitioners evolve with it.

    What inspired you to establish your own practice? What were some of the challenges you faced in the beginning, and how did you navigate those obstacles?

    I wanted to create a practice that delivered personalized, innovative legal solutions while maintaining the highest ethical standards combining the expertise of larger firms with the agility and client focus of boutique practices.

    Initial challenges included building credibility, establishing a client base, and managing financial constraints while maintaining service quality. 

    I navigated these through strategic relationship building, delivering exceptional results on smaller matters to build credibility, and focusing on becoming specialists in chosen practice areas rather than trying to be everything to everyone. We never compromised on quality to win business – a principle that ultimately distinguished us in the market.

    Cross-border transactions often involve navigating multiple legal frameworks and jurisdictions. How do you manage the complexities of these deals? What are the critical legal considerations businesses must keep in mind when engaging in cross-border transactions, and how do you ensure compliance with international legal standards while advising clients?

    We manage complexity through systematic due diligence across all relevant jurisdictions, collaborating with trusted local counsel worldwide. Our framework maps regulatory requirements, tax implications, and compliance obligations for each jurisdiction involved.

    Critical considerations include foreign investment regulations, tax treaty implications, currency exchange controls, sector-specific restrictions, dispute resolution mechanisms, and enforcement challenges across different legal systems.

    We ensure compliance through jurisdiction-specific checklists, regular regulatory updates, and maintaining relationships with qualified local counsel. Our approach emphasizes early identification of potential conflicts between legal systems and structuring transactions to minimize regulatory friction while ensuring comprehensive documentation that anticipates cross-jurisdictional enforcement challenges.

    With the evolving landscape of CSR compliance, what trends do you foresee emerging in the near future? Additionally, could you share how you guide clients in aligning their CSR strategies with both domestic and international laws?

    Emerging trends include mandatory climate disclosures, supply chain responsibility requirements, and stakeholder-centric reporting. We’re seeing convergence between ESG standards and domestic CSR requirements, with increased focus on measurable impact assessment and integration with business strategy.

    We guide clients by conducting comprehensive assessments of applicable domestic and international obligations, then developing CSR strategies that exceed minimum compliance while creating genuine business value. Our approach emphasizes robust documentation, impact measurement systems, regular compliance audits, and integration of CSR considerations into business decision-making processes.

    Start-ups face several challenges when it comes to establishing their legal foundations. What are the most common legal hurdles that start-ups should address early on? How do you assist them with crucial aspects like intellectual property rights, employee agreements, and business structuring?

    Common hurdles include inadequate business structuring, insufficient IP protection, poorly drafted founder and employee agreements, and underestimating regulatory compliance requirements.

    Our approach begins with comprehensive business structure analysis considering investment plans, tax efficiency, and regulatory requirements. For IP, we conduct thorough audits and establish protection strategies including trademark registrations and robust confidentiality frameworks. Employee agreements require balancing company protection with talent attraction—we draft comprehensive contracts and establish equity participation frameworks.

    We emphasize establishing good governance practices early, including board structures, decision-making processes, and compliance systems that become crucial as startups scale.

    Given your expertise in handling family estate disputes, what aspects of family law do you feel need more focus or reform? How do you approach succession planning for high-net-worth families, especially when dealing with complex cross-border elements?

    Family law needs greater focus on alternative dispute resolution and preventive legal structures. The current system often exacerbates conflicts rather than resolving them constructively.

    For high-net-worth succession planning, we begin with comprehensive family and asset mapping, then develop flexible structures adaptable to changing circumstances. Cross-border elements require careful jurisdiction selection, appropriate trust structures, and documentation that anticipates enforcement issues across different legal systems.

    Our methodology emphasizes family governance frameworks including family constitutions, communication protocols, and dispute resolution mechanisms, with regular plan updates to reflect changing family circumstances and regulatory environments.

    Trust formation is often a delicate issue, especially for business families. Could you elaborate on your approach to setting up trusts and advising clients on succession planning? What are some common misconceptions businesses or individuals might have about trust formation, and how do you address these?

    Our approach begins with thorough understanding of family dynamics, business structures, and long-term goals, then designing flexible trust structures that serve multiple purposes while maintaining adaptability.

    Common misconceptions include believing trusts provide absolute asset protection, assuming trust formation means loss of control, and underestimating ongoing compliance requirements. Many don’t understand differences between trust types and their specific applications.

    We address these through comprehensive education about trust mechanics, clear explanation of rights and obligations, and realistic assessment of benefits and limitations. For business families, we focus on structures facilitating business continuity while providing appropriate family financial security, often involving multiple trust vehicles and governance frameworks for family participation in business decisions.

    Your commitment to fostering diversity in the legal profession is commendable. How do you ensure aspiring lawyers have the mentorship and opportunities they need within your firm? What qualities do you look for when mentoring young lawyers, and what advice do you offer them as they navigate the legal profession?

    We ensure opportunities through inclusive hiring practices, structured mentorship programs pairing senior and junior lawyers across practice areas, meaningful work assignments, and regular professional development workshops.

    In mentoring, I look for intellectual curiosity, ethical grounding, strong communication skills, and resilience. Technical skills can be taught, but these fundamental qualities determine long-term success.

    My advice focuses on building strong foundational skills, maintaining ethical standards regardless of pressure, developing business acumen alongside legal expertise, and understanding that successful careers are built on relationships and reputation. Most importantly, find meaning in your work – legal practice provides unique opportunities to make positive differences in people’s lives.

    With your demanding career and leadership role, how do you personally manage work-life balance? Additionally, how do you encourage your team to maintain a healthy balance while excelling in their roles?

    I maintain balance through disciplined time management, prioritizing high-impact activities, delegating effectively, and protecting family time. Sustainable success comes from managing energy, not just time.

    For the team, we’ve implemented realistic project timelines, adequate staffing, flexible work arrangements where possible, and measure success by results and client satisfaction, not hours worked. We encourage time off and maintain open communication about workload concerns.

    Most importantly, I model healthy balance myself. Teams take cues from leadership, so demonstrating that it’s possible to excel professionally while maintaining personal well-being encourages others to do the same. We celebrate achievements and recognize that sustainable careers require attention to both professional and personal development.

    Get in touch with Purvi Mathur –

  • Crafting a Cross-Border Legal Career: Lessons from Public Policy and Arbitration – Sudhanshu Roy, Senior Associate at Foley Hoag LLP, United States.

    Crafting a Cross-Border Legal Career: Lessons from Public Policy and Arbitration – Sudhanshu Roy, Senior Associate at Foley Hoag LLP, United States.

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

    To start with, why and how did you choose law as your career? And if there was any specific inspiration or anything that you feel made the change in your mindset to choose law, being in India, having those kinds of challenges, we would request you to share those insights with us.

    In response to your specific question, I do recognize—having grown up in India, having spent almost the first 28, 29 years of my life in India—that, at least when I was growing up, law and the study of law were not seen as a very attractive career option.

    Let me put it very simply: people were more interested, as I recall, in studying the sciences, engineering, medicine, and architecture. Those kinds of professions were seen as more lucrative and more rewarding, from what I recall growing up.

    So, law was definitely not an attractive career option. Having said that, I was someone who was always interested in the study of social sciences, in the study of politics. You could say that that’s something that was bestowed upon me by my father, who is a professor of history. He is basically a social sciences academician himself. I was always surrounded by these books that were in the house—about world history, about ancient history, Greek history, Roman history, Indian history obviously. So, I used to be very fascinated by reading those books. Those used to be like coffee table books, from what I remember.

    My father used to bring them a lot. There used to be encyclopedias, so I was always interested in politics and history. And although I was a good student in science and maths as well, I always wanted to do something more related to how our society works, how our social systems work, how our political institutions work.

    And by the time I entered high school, I realized that studying law was probably the best way to understand it, because the law governs most of our political and social institutions. That was my motivation. I did not have any specific role models growing up, although I knew very well as a student of history that most of our leaders during the freedom movement—not only in India but almost all around the world—were lawyers. I realized that there must be something about the study of law that makes good leaders, that makes these leaders, these very cherished leaders of not just our freedom movement, as I said, but if you take the history of any country.

    You will see that most of the people who have risen to the top have studied law in some form or the other. So that was my interest, and that’s why I ended up being a lawyer. I did not have any specific branches or any specific disciplines in law in mind when I entered the legal profession. I just wanted to understand how, as I said, our society and our political institutions were.

    And that’s how I ended up being a lawyer.

    You were also equally interested in politics and that made the way towards law career because yes, all over the world, most of the politicians and leaders are lawyers also, and really in every country they have brought in a lot of changes. So was that the reason that you started your career from a leading Indian law firm which was specially focused on trade policies and government affairs. And later you also served as legal advisor to the Department of Economic Affairs, government of India.

    How did you end up there? First, my curiosity is that, and another thing, how did that form your perspective towards moving ahead and getting into international practice?

    That’s obviously a very relevant question that your listeners might be interested in hearing about.

    So, as I said, I did not have a specific practice of law in mind—whether it’s international law or arbitration, or litigation or transactions—when I started my life as a law student, because, from what I recall, in those days we did not even have this kind of information about the various disciplines and branches of law and the various types of legal practices or law firms. I started studying law in 2003, and the internet and the information age at that time were very much in its infancy. 

    I was just fascinated, as I said, by the concept of law and how we make laws, how the Parliament makes laws, how our Council of Ministers works, how the Cabinet works, from what sources they derive their powers—things like that. I did not have anything in mind, but as I started my student journey, there were a couple of events that shaped my career towards a more international practice.

    The first was that, you know, at that time—and I think even now—as law students, we do a lot of moot courts. So I was given an opportunity to do a moot court that was an international moot court on WTO Law. And this was organized by the European Students’ Law Association, ELSA, and our team at that time qualified for the world finals that were held in Geneva. I think this was in 2006. So I went to Geneva and argued before a tribunal a case that was related to the WTO, or the World Trade Organization, and the various laws that constitute that organization.

    I think that was a very prominent factor in shaping my career because I realized that law doesn’t just govern our national institutions but also governs international institutions—how countries trade with each other. There are defined, specific rules about how you trade, how much subsidies you can grant, what kinds of duties you can impose, what kinds of anti-dumping and countervailing measures a country can undertake against another country. I realized that law as a discipline is far broader than I thought, and I was just fascinated by the international aspect of it.

    And then, I think we had a professor at some point in my university career who was a professor from the University of Vienna. He was a professor in international law and a visiting professor for a semester. I developed a very close relationship with that professor who came to our university and taught us public international law, and he basically served as a mentor at that time in shaping, again, my career and my understanding of public international law.

    Again, public international law governs how states interact with each other on the international sphere. So that was again a very big motivating factor. So I think those two factors shaped my understanding of this international practice that I developed. And then we had specializations at that time.

    In our university, they used to have honors courses, so I chose an honors course in international law and trade. And that is how I specialized in what I do right now. And that is also how I ended up joining Amarchand in 2009. Amarchand had a very small practice of trade policy and government affairs, which was focused towards, again, working with the Government of India—obviously in Delhi—but also with other governments around the world on how they negotiate trade agreements, how they negotiate bilateral investment treaties.

    I joined that practice, and I can answer more, but that’s how I ended up at Amarchand. And one thing led to the other, and I’ve been doing this for almost 15, 16 years.

    Wow, that’s an amazing journey. You later pursued your LLM at the prestigious NYU School of Law and received notable scholarships like Vanderbilt and Inlaks. What do you think helped you secure these, was it your work, your clarity of purpose, or your passion for international law? How did these recognitions shape your professional path? And how have they contributed to establishing you as a prominent international law practitioner today?

    Again, a very relevant question. I did my stint with Amarchand & Mangaldas in New Delhi. Then, as I said, I moved on to the Government of India, where I worked as an in-house lawyer in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, helping the government again negotiate bilateral investment treaties, free trade agreements, as well as manage disputes with foreign investors.

    So I had that kind of experience, and when you’re in the government, the government works with all kinds of people—whether they’re lawyers, policymakers, or people in international institutions. So I interacted with people from all around the world when I was working as an in-house legal counsel in the Ministry of Finance. And that shaped my thinking in terms of taking up advanced study of international law, because I realized that international law is a very academic discipline—perhaps more academic than other disciplines—because you need to write a lot.

    There’s a lot of critical research and critical thinking. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen in other branches of law, but in international law, perhaps it happens a lot more. So I realized that I needed an advanced degree because it was a very academic discipline, based on my interactions with the people that I met at that time.

    So yeah, I applied to a lot of universities. I was accepted into many universities—Harvard, Columbia, and Berkeley. But I ended up choosing NYU because I think New York is the hub, the center, probably the global center of international arbitration as a practice. And that is what I was interested in.

    And I also received this very prestigious scholarship, which you just mentioned—the Vanderbilt Scholarship at NYU—which covered a lot of my tuition and expenses. And I received that scholarship because I think I had a very clear sense of purpose about what I wanted to do. I think these kinds of scholarships are awarded by universities to people who are keen to learn, who absolutely show in their applications that they’re going to be at the university—it’s a very short time, the LLM is only for a year—so in that one year, they’re there to actually learn something new, and then utilize the instruction that they received or the education they received to do something more meaningful. So I think I was able to very clearly explain in my application what I wanted to do—not just with my time at NYU for a year, but beyond that. 

    I was also awarded another scholarship in India, which is called the Inlaks Scholarship, I think, which is also very prominent. And from what I recall, I was able to bring forth to the selection committee for that scholarship as well how my career in law had been up until that point, what were the kinds of things that I hadn’t done, and what it was that I wanted to do beyond my LLM at NYU. And I think they were also very, very impressed by the fact that I had worked in the government for about two and a half, three years, because that’s not something very common—especially if you are working in a big Indian law firm.

    Most people generally move to another law firm or do something else—they don’t generally go to work for the government or take a pay cut. So I think I was able to explain that I went to the government because I think in international arbitration, if you see, one of the biggest defendants—one of the entities that is sued the most—I mean, it’s obviously common in domestic litigation as well, but in the international sphere too, governments are sued and also sue very often. The government is a huge, huge stakeholder in the international arbitration system—not just the Government of India, but governments around the world. I again wanted to understand from the institutional perspective: what are the priorities, what are the policy interests that governments have in these kinds of disputes?

    And I also knew that there are lots of law practices, especially in the West—in the United States and in Europe—that are focused on the defense of sovereign governments in these kinds of disputes. I knew that if I worked in-house as a government lawyer, that experience could help me find a career at an international law firm or an international institution which values that kind of experience. Again, all of this was brought forth, probably in my application, which is why I was lucky enough to be selected for these scholarships.

    And then I had a great time at NYU, and after that I joined Foley Hoag, which—as I think was explained in the introduction—is an international law firm which specializes in the defense of sovereign states and state-owned entities in international arbitration and international litigation. So that is the kind of work I do. When I was in India, I obviously did a lot of work for the Government of India, but now I’ve done work for governments all around the world.

    I can name a few—I’ve defended Croatia, Ecuador, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, Thailand, Nepal, Mauritius. There are so many countries around the world that I’ve been fortunate enough to work for and defend.

    So I think I am still very much a student and a learner, but what I’ve been able to do is utilize my experience that I obtained while I was in India—working in a law firm and in the government—and now I’m applying and using that experience to further and broaden my legal career and legal perspectives beyond just India.

     After listening to you, I cannot stop myself, but ask, as I understand learners will also be very much interested, that how did you make move from one of the top law firm private practice to the government of India work because it’s not easy transition and you do not get such kind of work or as a legal counsel, you do not get appointed without having certain amount of experience, the kind of portrayal of your practice, what was the process that you followed maybe that will help our learners?

    And next, like you explained that I wanted to get into international arbitration and international law, by then you had already decided. How helpful was being with the government of India? Not only to get the scholarships, but also get the right kind of subjects being chosen?

    Because as far as I understand, LLMs, you choose as many subjects as possible in the US, and you are allowed to have a lot of interactive subjects also. So how did you do that? How helpful was your stint with the government of India in doing all of this?

    It was very, very helpful to put it mildly.

    I don’t think I’d be where I am today if not for my experience with the Government of India. Now, as I said, it’s not a common transition from private law firm practice to the government, and it’s not an easy transition. But as I explained a while ago, at Amarchand we were already working with the government and various government institutions on things like negotiation of free trade agreements, negotiation of bilateral investment treaties.

    We were also working on various law reform initiatives. I remember, at that time, we were working, for example, with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on the redrafting of the legislation called the Societies Registration Act 1860. From what I remember—I don’t know if that’s been done—but those are the kinds of things we were working on.

    I was already very familiar with government institutions in my work as a private lawyer with Amarchand. And that also was not a very common practice. But we had set this up in Amarchand with a very small team, just three people, and we were doing this kind of government public policy work.

    I was already very familiar with government institutions, and what happened was that the government at that time was facing a lot of these international disputes. It was receiving notices from a lot of multinational companies, which had grievances and disputes with regard to various measures that the government—not just the Government of India, but also various state governments and local governments—had undertaken.

    The people, the relevant powers that be in the government, were very familiar with our firm and very familiar with me and my work. They liked what they saw, and they felt that they needed someone not as an external—I mean, of course they would hire external lawyers—but they also needed someone in-house to manage these disputes and manage these treaty negotiations for them.

    And they really liked my profile because at that time I was quite new, relatively new. And they needed someone who was a doer, who was a worker, who could actually sit and draft things. And they probably liked my passion for international law and international arbitration.

    It’s not something that I actively sought, but it was something that I was offered—a chance. And this was, again, not very common even for the government, because as you know, in the government they don’t generally hire people from outside. I know there are some initiatives that have been taken in the last four or five years where they have hired people, but in 2013, there were virtually no people from outside being hired.

    There were a few people hired as consultants. But I think those were people who were retired or had a very significant amount of experience—which in my case, there was not, because I had barely three or four years of experience. It was a very significant and groundbreaking initiative undertaken by the ministry at that time to hire an external, young professional, which was me at that time.

    And they offered me the opportunity. I did not actively seek it. And that’s how I ended up there—because they were very familiar with my work, and I think they saw me as the right person who was going to be managing these cases for the government. And I managed all kinds of disputes with foreign investors generally, because the Ministry of Finance at that time—there was a body which has been abolished by now—but it was called the Foreign Investment Promotion Board.

    And the Foreign Investment Promotion Board was responsible at that time for the entry and admission of all foreign investors in India. So I used to work with that cell, managing disputes with foreign investors—whether it was before domestic courts or whether it was an international dispute. And so that’s how I ended up there.

    And again, I think that was a very relevant experience because, as I already said, in international arbitration—especially when you’re talking about investor-state arbitration—it’s literally called “investor-state.” One party is the investor; the other party is the state. Working for the state is a very, very relevant experience that any young professional can have, and I would encourage people to get that experience, especially if you’re keen in this field, because 50% of the dispute is about the state, and 50% is about the investor. You get a wide perspective about how state institutions work, what the policy priorities are—things like that. I gained that relevant experience and then used it to advance my career in the ways that I could at that time.

     You have represented, as you said, many, many sovereign and private clients across the globe within arbitral work.   In your view, what kind of procedures do you look forward to, or what kind of strategic restrictions have you seen while working with these kinds of forums in different jurisdictions? How do you see those differences and how your study in India and your study as an LLM student in the US has shaped your understanding and has helped you build such procedures, such strategic points to develop those drafts?

    Because they are the only ones which we are privy to and we learn from those. So how have you worked towards these concepts and aspects to make sure that it is understandable by the layman I would say? Also how do you make sure that governments make it easier for the society, in any jurisdiction whatsoever you have worked with?

    Each case, each country, as you said, it’s very different. I mean, obviously there are certain common international law rules and standards which all states have to abide by.

    There are certain normative standards in any international treaty—whether it’s a bilateral treaty or a multilateral treaty—there are common standards that have to be followed, whether it’s by the state or by a foreign investor, whether it’s by an international institution or individuals.

    That is there. But I think what I’ve learned is that each case and each dispute, in your capacity as a practitioner—probably if you practice dispute resolution in any form—you would’ve realized and understood that each case is different.

    I think it’s about understanding and applying the specific facts of each case, because these are complex disputes. The moment a state is involved in a dispute, it gets more complicated than any other private dispute, because when you’re talking about a state—and let’s take the example of India, or we could take the example of any state, honestly, in my view—even a small state, like a small country, relatively small like Mauritius, because I’ve done a lot of cases for the Government of Mauritius, it’s an island. But the government in any country is a very large machinery. It’s probably one of the largest employers. It has many organs, it has many departments, ministries, and the government under international law is not just the central government, the federal government. Under international law, state responsibility arises not just for the actions of the government at the central level, but also at the state level, also at the municipal level. Any actor, any person who’s acting on behalf of the state or exercising governmental authority—the actions of such a person or entity—can give rise to state responsibility under international law.

    So what you’re dealing with is a very large and complicated institutional mechanism. You have to understand how it works, and it works in different ways in each system, each country. Now, there are certain common threads. For example, one common thread that I’ve learned in all of these cases is that each government has an interest in protecting its policy space, protecting its regulatory space.

    So, for example, one of the earliest cases that I did while I was here in Foley Hoag was a case for the government of— I mean, I was not directly involved in that case, but I know of that case. We did a case for the Government of Uruguay. And this case was a challenge by a very big international tobacco company called Philip Morris against the laws that were passed by the Government of Uruguay mandating that all cigarette packets should only have plain packaging—like you cannot have any advertisements or logos or any form of branding on a cigarette package that is out for sale in a supermarket or in a shop. And I think, for example, India also has some kind of similar laws, because you need to display on a very wide and big scale on any cigarette pack that it’s injurious for health. And you have all these kinds of gross photos and everything that show what cigarette smoking can lead to.

    So foreign investors—not just in Uruguay, but I’m aware that in other countries around the world—also challenge those kinds of actions because they said that it is an attack on their intellectual property, because as manufacturers, they have a right to advertise and to display their brand on cigarette packets.

    But the government’s position was that no, this is something that is undertaken in public interest. This is something that is undertaken to protect public health, because the government has an interest in protecting the health and environment of a wider degree of population. So the argument is that the public interest of the state in promoting health and promoting the non-use of cigarettes takes precedence over the intellectual property rights of a foreign investor. So that’s the tension. That was the tension in that dispute.

    So, as I said, all governments have some sort of policy interest and regulatory interest that they want to protect. And whenever that clashes with the interest of the commercial—mostly commercial—interest of the foreign investor, that gives rise to disputes.

    And that is the challenge that you have to understand in each case. Each case has different facts, and you have to first understand the facts—what are you dealing with? And then obviously, there are certain common standards and norms that you have to apply to those facts.I think that’s the challenge that I faced in every case or every dispute that I handled.

    You are also admitted to the bar of Washington DC, New York, and New Delhi as well, which is in itself an achievement. How has this multi-jurisdictional licensing for yourself helped your legal practice? And how do you see that managing all of these demanding practices across different legal systems has helped you not only understand as a person how much you can influence public policy making, especially keeping in mind your strength in India and the way you are working internationally as well. We would request you to share some nuggets about those so that we can understand how one can plan their future the way you have done?

    Firstly, let me take a step back. If you want to practice as a lawyer in the United States, you have to be admitted to the bar. So I don’t think it’s something very revolutionary. I mean, you have to pass an exam, which I think is a very tricky exam. I’m not gonna say that it’s a tough or a difficult exam—it’s quite tricky because it’s quite unlike what students of India must be used to taking in the form of exams.

    It’s a very practically oriented exam, and it’s an exam that is focused more on your legal writing and your practical skills—bringing out your practical skills as a lawyer. So you have to pass that exam to be able to practice as a lawyer in the United States, like it is the case in India.

    I passed that exam, which, as I said, was a very tricky and different kind of exam. And then, when you practice as an international arbitration lawyer, you practice in various jurisdictions—because it’s literally international. The dispute or the parties or the elements of the case could be from anywhere around the world, which is why I am also admitted in DC, because Washington, DC is a very relevant jurisdiction. We have the World Bank here, we have the DC Circuit Court and the DC District Court where a lot of these lawsuits by foreign investors are filed—whether it’s for the enforcement of awards or whether it’s for set-aside.

    I think, as an international arbitration lawyer, you have to have a very international profile, and it always makes sense to be admitted and recognized in these various jurisdictions so that people know about your profile. That also helps with attracting more work, and people again know about you.

    And so that’s why I’m not just admitted in DC, but for example, I’m also—I think it was mentioned in the introduction I’m a fellow of the Malaysian Institute of Arbitrators. So again, what I try to do is cast a very wide net, because in terms of building my international profile, it’s very important that I am visible and present in various jurisdictions—and which is why I’m admitted.

    Thank you so much. I know it’s very important to be admitted to the bar just to practice, but as you’ve said, it’s very tricky in the US unlike to what we are accustomed in India, there is a huge difference between the way we take this here and how it is there, so definitely it’s a super achievement. I want to say. Although it’s mandatory, it’s still a big achievement.

    But I just wanted to add one more thing for people who may listen to this interview. I don’t know how many people would, but if you want to practice and come here in the US, one very, very important thing—as lawyers in India, at least from the time that I was studying—is that there’s a significant amount of difference in legal writing. I mean, the US is also a very common law-based system. Although it’s developed in a very unique way, India is still very rooted and very similar to how the English legal system has traditionally been. But the US is also a common law system.

    So, understanding the laws here and understanding how institutions work is not an issue, but the practice of law—the practical aspect of practicing law—is very, very different. I do not think, and I do not recall from my time in India, whether it was as a student or a practitioner, devoting enough attention to and developing my skills as a writer.

    But as opposed to that, in the US, writing is probably the most important skillset you will have as a lawyer. Of course, oral advocacy is important, and in India, I think we are very good oral advocates. We are brilliant orators, and we are good debaters. That is something that comes naturally.

    But I don’t think there’s enough attention paid to legal writing. I think even the bar exam is a test of your legal writing skills, because I think there’s one day—from what I recall now, this is 10 years ago—but one day is devoted specifically to writing essays. And in India, I remember when I used to write essays in exams, it was all about filling the number of pages. You just write as many pages as you can in the shortest time possible and cite as many cases as you can. If you do that in the US, you’re most certainly going to fail. There is absolutely no doubt. The professor or the evaluator is not even going to read your paper.

    They’re going to throw it away in the bin. So it’s not about filling the pages—it’s really about being succinct. Being precise and being concise is very, very important. There’s a famous quote that “brevity is the soul of writing.” I don’t know who this quote is attributed to, but this is very, very important.

    Brevity is very important. In the US, you have to be able to write and convey things in a very simple, in a very layman sort of way. Unlike India, where we sometimes use these heavy proses, complex words, and very long paragraphs. That doesn’t sell. Even if you look at the judgments of the courts in India—sometimes we have Supreme Court judgments—I remember reading some of these constitutional law judgments of 500, 600 pages. I remember there was a case, a famous case called Indira Sawhney versus Union of India. This was a case on reservation. This was like some thousand pages. It was a very landmark case. But if you take a landmark case here in the US, written by the Supreme Court, it would no longer be more than 30, 40, 50 pages.

    So, if you want to come here and practice as a lawyer, think about developing your writing skills. Think about being concise. Think about being precise. And do not think about just filling in the number of pages, because then you’re going to not just do poorly in your master’s or whatever other legal studies you pursue, but also not do well on your bar exam.

    I think that’s a very important lesson that I learned—and I’m still learning—because it takes time to adapt between different legal systems.

    Thank you for honestly highlighting the need to unlearn and relearn, especially around precision in legal writing. As we near the end of this conversation, I’d like to ask, how have you managed your work-life balance while engaging in high-intensity arbitration, academic writing, and speaking at global forums? What practices have helped you maintain your mental, physical, and professional well-being? Could you share your checklist with our learners?

    That’s again a very relevant question. I think, especially in this age where there’s so much intense competition and there are obviously work pressures everywhere.

    I think that’s something I don’t think I’ve mastered, but I’m happy to share what I do. I’m still a learner, and I think most of us are learners. So, one thing that I certainly have is the capacity—the mental capacity—I’ve developed to be able to switch off and on. When I’m working, I’m fully focused on working, but I do know that at some point during the day or during the week, I’m not going to be working. So I have the capacity to switch off and focus on my personal life. I have a family, I have kids—I have two young boys—which I think helps. I’m not saying it’s going to be the same for everyone, but people could have different motivations and things to do in their personal lives.

    It could be a hobby, it could be anything, but I think it’s important to recognize that your life extends not just to your profession or your practice—it extends beyond that. There are important things beyond that. So I have the mental capacity to switch on and off, and it doesn’t take me a long time to do that.

    I’m very, very flexible, and fortunately, I mean, work is very intense, but my colleagues and my employers are very flexible in the sense that I can switch off at any time. For example, on a day when I do not have a lot of work and I have sufficient downtime, I can completely switch off and focus on my family—take my kids out to play soccer or football, as you call it in India—or do something with them, or just read a book or watch a movie.

    So I think I do that. The second thing I’ve very much learned—and I think this comes with age; for very young people, this may be difficult because you’re still trying to develop and establish yourself—but I think it’s very important to focus on your physical health, because we ignore that.

    I certainly have learned in the last, I would say, three, four, five years to focus on my physical health. I at least take out like 30 to 40 minutes in the day—not much, because you don’t get more than that—to just focus on my physical health. I get up early in the morning, do some sort of physical activity, eat the right kind of food. I think it’s very important, because sometimes as lawyers—I remember, especially when I started my career—we used to eat all kinds of junk food. I have realized, I think these are very small things, may sound insignificant, but again, all of it is connected and affects your mental health and your physical health.

    I think eating the right kind of food, getting enough sleep is very important. You will have days and you will have zones where you will not be able to do these kinds of things. For example, when I’m in a hearing—in arbitration, especially in international arbitration—hearings are held in a block.

    It’s not like in India where you have a court date, and then you get another date two months later, and then you come back. Our hearings are like 5- or 10-day hearings, and they’re held in a block, in a consecutive period. So, for example, when I’m in a hearing or preparing for a hearing, there would be two or three weeks when I’m not able to do any of this.

    When I’m not able to do any exercise, when I’m not focusing on eating the right kind of food, when I do not have any personal downtime. But that’s something that you have to accept, because it’s a very intense and demanding practice. And at the end of it, there is a reward.

    When you finish your hearing, when you finish these intense periods, then you know that you will get a downtime. So, you focus on that downtime, you work hard during that period, and then you switch off once that is over. I think switching on and off, eating the right kind of food, physical activity, and recognizing that there is a life and there are important things to do beyond the law and beyond your practice—

    I think these are the three or four things that I have recognized as important. That said, again, as I said, I’m still learning, and it’s not like I’m in peak physical health or anything, but mentally—I think also mentally—it’s very important. Sometimes mental health is ignored—I would say more in India than in the US.

    It’s very important that if you have an issue or if you have a challenge, you speak to your peers, you speak to your colleagues. You don’t hesitate to speak out. If you’re facing a particular issue in your workplace, you speak to your family. Don’t keep it within yourself.

    Don’t be lonely. I think go out and make friends, make acquaintances, and recognize that law is just—ultimately—it’s just a career, right? You know it’s going to get over at some point, and then you’re going to do something different. So find something different.

    That’s the challenge, I would say.

    Get in touch with Sudhanshu Roy –

  • “The allure of working at the apex court and daydreams of arguing before a Constitution Bench inspired my aspiration to become an AoR.” – Shivank Pratap Singh, Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India.

    “The allure of working at the apex court and daydreams of arguing before a Constitution Bench inspired my aspiration to become an AoR.” – Shivank Pratap Singh, Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India.

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

    Becoming an Advocate-on-Record is a notable milestone. How has this role influenced your practice, and what added responsibilities and opportunities has it brought with it?

    At the felicitation event for the Advocate-on-Record (AoR) cohort I was part of, one of the office bearers remarked on how many current Supreme Court judges and successful senior advocates once held the AoR designation. I fully agree, it is indeed a significant milestone. From the very beginning of my legal career, I have been involved in matters before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Even as a law student, while interning with a Senior Advocate who was then the Additional Solicitor General of India, and another renowned Advocate-on-Record, my interest in practicing at the Supreme Court grew substantially. The allure of working at the apex court and daydreams of arguing before a Constitution Bench inspired my aspiration to become an AoR. Professionally, becoming an AoR has had a profound impact on my practice. A significant portion of my clientele comprises corporates, PSUs, and government bodies, many of whose matters ultimately reach the Supreme Court. Knowing that I am an AoR provides them the assurance that I can seamlessly handle their cases from initiation to conclusion. Furthermore, the AoR designation has opened new avenues, particularly access to appeals originating from courts outside Delhi, which make up a large portion of the Supreme Court’s docket. This has allowed me to engage with unfamiliar legal terrains, such as matters relating to mining or religious endowments, that are not commonly litigated in Delhi, thereby broadening both my exposure and expertise.

    You began your career with some of the top law firms in the country. What were some of the most impactful experiences during that time that significantly shaped your professional trajectory?

    Looking back, I feel quite lucky to have started out at some of the leading law firms in India. Making the shift from law school to a Tier-1 firm was a bit of a shock to the system at first. One day you’re attending lectures and the next you’re handling serious matters for big companies, many of them multinationals with huge stakes involved. There was a real sense that everything had to be perfect from the get-go, especially when it came to drafting and research. As a junior associate, that kind of pressure can either rattle you or sharpen you.

    In my case, I think it did the latter. The fast-paced, high-stakes environment taught me to be meticulous and put in the work, right from day one. That habit stuck, and it’s something I still carry with me, no matter what kind of matter I’m dealing with.

    One memory that stands out from those early days was when I was asked within my first week to brief Mr. P. Chidambaram, Senior Advocate, on a writ petition related to service tax. I won’t lie, I was nervous. I stayed up most of the night going over every detail of the case so I’d be ready. It was a trial by fire, but somehow, it went well and gave me a real boost of confidence.

    Beyond individual moments, what really shaped me was the overall work culture particularly during my time at AZB & Partners and Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas. I got to work with international clients and interact with foreign lawyers, which gave me a fresh perspective. One thing that really stood out was how structured and transparent their approach was; frequent updates, clear timelines, and detailed billing were the norm. I’ve tried to bring some of that structure into my own work now, and it’s definitely helped in building better client relationships.

    Having worked with both reputed law firms and Senior Advocates, what key differences have you observed in terms of work environment, nature of responsibilities, and overall approach to legal practice?

    The common aspect of both law firms as well as senior advocates is that as associates/juniors there is an expectation of high level of professionalism. Working in a dispute resolution team at a law firm entails a lot of team work and coordination. Law firms also have a hierarchical structure and within a few years an associate upon getting promoted is expected to lead, guide and train junior members of the team as well. It is also noteworthy that in full service law firms we often worked with lawyers from corporate, transaction and tax teams where their clients got into matters of litigation. This is an advantage of working at full service law firms where even though you may be in a litigation team, there are instances where you get to experience and work along with peers from different practice areas which broadens your horizon. In contrast, when you are working with a senior advocate, there is no hierarchy as such and juniors are expected to directly assist the senior. In turn, however, you get to learn directly from the senior who has decades of experience in the field. There is also no expectation or requirement to lead or supervise other chamber members as each of them would assist the senior in their individual capacities. As far as the responsibilities are concerned, there is a clear distinction in role one plays as a lawyer at a law firm in contrast to a junior in the chamber of a designated Senior Advocate. Most of your readers would already know that Senior Advocates do not engage with litigants directly and the solicitors are their clients essentially. Further, Senior Advocates chambers do not draft pleadings and do not file matters. The aforesaid tasks are to be executed with great sincerity and precision in a law firm. I was lucky to have incredible mentors like Ms. Roopali Singh, Former Senior Partner AZB and Partners and currently the head of dispute resolution at Vritti Legal. I learnt the basics and nuances of drafting under her tutelage. In the initial years of practice at law firms, all filing related tasks are handled by the junior members of the team in collaboration with the court clerks. It is an art to file a petition with minimal or no defects and in cases which are time sensitive and urgent in nature, it can be a make or break thing. I think my experience in law firms also helped me gain proficiency in filing procedures dealing with the registry which is often overlooked as a rudimentary task. 

    In contrast, working with a senior advocate is totally focussed on mastering the facts and the law of the case and working with the Senior to bring out the most impactful and precise arguments for addressing the court. My Senior, Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Senior Advocate is a product of Dr. AM Singhvi’s chamber and the first thing I learnt from him was a particular style of preparing a note for arguments which he had learnt from his senior, Dr. Singhvi. This consists of a list of relevant dates, submissions and response to contra points. I still follow this format for matters that I argue on my own and even for briefing other Senior Advocates in my matters. Working in a senior’s chamber also means more number of cases to deal with on a daily basis for hearings as compared to a big law firm where the number of hearings per day would be significantly lesser. 

    With a background in Computer Science (BTech), what inspired your transition to a career in law? How did your experience in law school shape your journey, and in what ways has your engineering education contributed to your legal practice? 

    A career in law was never on my list. I had started preparing for MBA exams like CAT in my final year of engineering and scored well in my first attempt. I decided to improve my score to get into a top IIM and dropped a year after completing Btech to reappear in CAT. In the meanwhile, on a friend’s suggestion, I gave the Delhi University, Faculty of Law entrance and cleared that. I enrolled and started attending classes out of curiosity. As fate would have it, I liked what was being taught in law college and jettisoned the plan of doing the MBA, leading to a switch in a career to law. 

    The Delhi University 3 year course experience is quite different from 5 year BA LLB residential programs. Even though we had excellent professors, there was a lack of guidance regarding career options post law school. So I decided it was best to intern as much as possible and get a taste of different practice areas and offices. Being in Delhi helped because there were several options from law firms to reputed chambers where one could look to land an internship. After interning extensively in various offices, I felt that being a first generation lawyer, the best option for me was to join a law firm preferably a tier one firm which pays well ;). I was lucky to intern a couple of times at the AZB and Partners Delhi Office and had offers to join the capital markets team and dispute resolution team. Given my interest in litigation I chose the latter. That was the formal start of my journey in litigation which I thoroughly cherish. 

    My science and engineering background has helped me immensely in practice. This was felt particularly while working on matters of interstate river water disputes where I was on the legal team from the State of Andhra Pradesh, led by Mr. R Venkatramani, Sr Adv and presently Attorney General of India. Water disputes require advocates to understand highly technical concepts related to hydrology, cropping etc. which in my humble opinion can be grasped better, faster and deeper by a student of science and technology as compared to someone who hasn’t received training and education in sciences. Even in my construction arbitration practice I have reaped the benefit of my science background, particularly on disputes arising out of issues relating to design and specifications in a construction contract. 

    You’ve advised and represented construction and project management firms in high-stakes arbitration involving contractor and subcontractor disputes. What are some of the recurring challenges in such matters, and how do you approach them to secure effective outcomes?

    A lot of claims in construction and infrastructure disputes arise out of delays. Delays can be on many accounts,  Invariably, when there is a dispute between a private party and government entity, it is the latter who is blamed to cause delay. Delays could arise on various counts such as lack of statutory approvals, late handover of site, change in scope of work and delay in delivery in drawings and designs, which are out of the contractor’s control. On the other hand, if a contractor defaults in its obligations and causes a delay, claims for liquidated damages (if already specified in the contract) or damages for breach can be made against the contractor by the principal. These are situations which should be handled tactically at an early stage before an aggrieved party precipitates the issue to become a legal dispute. A lot of these disputes can even be avoided by careful drafting of contracts which eliminates ambiguity. Proper contract management and risk mitigation is another aspect that parties must consider to avoid and reduce potential liabilities in the event a dispute arises. Once a dispute has been referred to arbitration, the first thing I would try to achieve, in case I am representing a claimant, is to identify if there are special equities in its favour which might result in getting interim relief in the form of stay on bank guarantees and forfeiture of security deposits. This is extremely difficult, albeit, not impossible and can go a long way in securing some level of financial relief for a party at the very inception of a dispute. I also believe that bringing on board experts can prove critical for the outcome in complex arbitration matters. The impact that experts make is greater in cases where there is a sole arbitrator who is trained judicially as a judge or an advocate. Expert reports along with oral testimonies can often bring the desired clarity to an arbitrator’s mind which can tip the scales in such disputes. 

    Another great challenge that counsels may face is the ‘Arbitrator’. Today we have a lot of talks, conferences and events centred on the arbitration practice. Every month something would be organized where lawyers, judges, in-house counsel, people from the law ministry come and give speeches about making India a hub for international arbitration, how challenge to awards and court interference should be limited etc. However, a topic which is often overlooked is the quality of arbitrators we have in our country, particularly with respect to their integrity. Unfortunately, if a party is pitted against an arbitrator who is deciding the matter for extraneous reasons, an effective immediate solution may not always be on the cards. In such cases it may be wise to come to a reasonable settlement. 

    Representing the Union of India and UPSC before various judicial forums, including the Supreme Court, involves complex litigation. How do you manage the legal and strategic dimensions of handling high-stakes public and service law matters on behalf of the government?

    In my humble opinion, the most important part about litigating on behalf of the government is to get proper instructions from the concerned officers. I have been lucky to have worked with incredibly competent and energetic officers during my tenure as a panel counsel with various government entities which has helped me in effectively representing them before Courts. In the Supreme Court, the critical cases involving the Union of India are led by the Additional Solicitor Generals, the Solicitor General and the Attorney General. Briefing such stalwarts on matters which involve questions of interpretation of the constitution, issues related to national security, legality of policy decisions which has implications of thousands of crores is like doing a masters of law on these subjects with real life implications. Working closely with these Seniors on 300 + matters in the Supreme Court, often handling 5 fresh cases a day has helped me develop an instinct to identify what is most important in a petition to highlight and show to the Court. This experience has helped me with the skill to manage client expectations and offer better advice regarding the reliefs that are likely to be granted in their favor, rather than what is initially requested and prayed for. This is an essential part of advocacy whether you are representing the government or a private party. Sometimes our instincts may not be accurate enough, and the client may benefit from providence and get the relief they expected rather than the conservative outcome predicted by their advocate, however, such victories also taste sweet. 

    Looking back, what has been one of the most challenging cases in your career so far, and how did you approach and resolve the complexities involved?

    Well, every case is challenging and has a certain degree of complexity involved, we wouldn’t be in Court otherwise ! I will, however, talk about a couple which came first to my mind when I read this question. This is a recent one where I was appointed as an amicus by the Supreme Court for an accused to whom notice could not be served and accordingly, he didn’t appear before the court. As we know, criminal matters cannot proceed ex parte, so I was appointed to assist the court on behalf of the accused. The allegations in this case were very grave which attracted provisions of POCSO. The challenge here was that I was representing a client who I never interacted with, which was a first for me. Upon thorough and meticulous examination of the trial court record, I successfully presented a defence that was accepted by the Court, resulting in the confirmation of his acquittal against the prosecution’s case.

    A second very challenging case was one where I appeared on behalf of the revenue authorities before the Supreme Court and the question of interpretation of a customs and excise circular was involved. The other side was represented by Mr. Arvind Datar Sr Adv. After Mr. Datar’s arguments were concluded, the bench was convinced that I had no case, in fact the question put to me was – “what is left to argue now ?”. It is only because I had extensively prepared the matter, made a comprehensive note for arguments which had all the relevant page numbers cross referenced and had a compilation of judgments which was again numbered with an index which indicated the relevant paragraphs, that I could persuade the court to consider my submissions which lasted for around 45 minutes. It involved rigorous grilling from the bench as well. The judgment was reserved and the opposite party got the relief sought, but the experience I gained was something remarkable and gave me the confidence to have faith in myself irrespective of the stature and calibre of the counsel on the opposite side.  

    Given your diverse expertise across litigation and arbitration, what guidance would you offer to young lawyers who are just starting out, especially those aspiring to build a robust career in litigation?

    Today a fresh graduate who wishes to pursue litigation has 3-4 different kinds of workplaces to start out. It could be the chamber of an advocate or senior advocate, a law firm, an in-house role where substantial litigation work exists or as a research associate/law clerk with a High Court or Supreme Court Judge. Out of these, 3 roles are transitory and one cannot continue in that position or establishment for their entire career. Law firms are one such place where you can start as an associate and rise up the ranks in a fairly structured and predictable manner. I would suggest someone who is a first generation lawyer without significant financial support from their family who does not have a great appetite for risk and uncertainty (which is certain in private practice), should try and join a law firm. It will give them financial stability, reasonable exposure to courts along with other advantages of working in law firms which I have already touched upon in some earlier questions. People who are passionate about law and want to build their own practice in the future should join a busy chamber and then look for a good senior’s chamber to polish and sharpen their skills further. Another thing worth noting in litigation is that one should be ready and available to work everyday of the week for long hours on a consistent basis under mentors and bosses who are strict and demand the highest standards. Going through such rigours is the best thing that a budding litigator can do for themselves. A quote attributable to a great figure- Abraham Lincoln may give my suggestion more context, which goes – “You can’t sharpen your razor on velvet”

    Is there a core philosophy or guiding principle that you’ve followed throughout your legal career? Looking ahead, how do you envision the growth of your practice in the evolving legal landscape in India?

    I have been a lawyer for a decade now. A core philosophy or guiding principle which has been there through and through is absent as far as I am concerned. But along the way I have learnt a few things which guide me now and I view them as beneficial generally. 

    There is one quote that I picked up from a book called “The 38 Letters from JD Rockefeller to his Son”. In one of the letters JD Rockefeller tells his son that – “To eat an elephant, you need to eat one bite at a time. The same goes to when you are doing something. If you want to accomplish everything in one go, you will only let the opportunity slip away.”  

    So, this field is a big elephant, you have to eat it one at a time. We cannot be an expert in every field of law or build a great network or have a great team or accomplish several other things which are essential for a successful practice, all at once. If we attempt that, there will be chaos which would lead to anxiety and nothing will be accomplished. Therefore, my 2 cents on an approach to a career in law would be to gradually advance, be patient, and take actions which are planned, structured and precise. This will slowly build into something very impressive and worth cherishing.  

    The second would be to be bold and ready to get outside your comfort zone. When I observe, read and hear about the great individuals who have been in this profession, the thought which comes to my mind is that if they could do it, why not me. This thought keeps me going when the chips seem to be down and doubt arises. 

    Third and last one is – to prioritise learning and upskilling. Look out for the latest trends and take the first mover advantage in this highly competitive market. 

    We are a rapidly growing firm led by two partners and one tax consultant. Apart from the conventional practice areas we are also looking at the future and emerging fields such as law and regulations surrounding AI, its impact on intellectual property, cybersecurity, energy law and data privacy. These fields are interesting from an academic as well as practice stand point. Jurisprudence on these subjects will rapidly develop in the future. As I have said before, there are opportunities for the early entrants which is golden for new firms like ours as the entry barriers are less. It goes without saying that we will build upon our strengths and continue serving our existing clients with top notch tier one level service in a cost effective manner, while we strive to grow by expanding our teams and clientele.  

    Get in touch with Shivank Pratap Singh –