Super Lawyer

Category: Interviews

  • “Law, when aligned with vision, becomes a silent accelerator of growth.” – Khush Brahmbhatt, Founder of Aadharshila Law.

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

    What first motivated you to pursue a career in law, and how did your early legal education shape your approach to both advisory work and litigation?

    I belong to the Humble family and they invested more in my education and due to which I have been able to gain a lot of experiences and those that created an impact on me. From the outset, I recognised that law is far more than statutes and court-rooms it is a tool to shape outcomes, protect rights, and empower people and enterprises. My training combined courtroom exposure with campus engagement at Faculty of Law, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, which instilled two enduring habits: (1) translating legal complexity into ease of understanding by the professors; and (2) approaching things from grassroots considering not just what the law says, but what the client needs. That dual lens continues to drive my advisory and litigation practice. Also my Senior Colleagues have been fantastic mentors who have given me open sources to learn and opportunities to analyse and act.

    What inspired you to establish your own practice, and how did your initial professional experiences guide your vision of combining legal expertise with strategic business advisory?

    I worked with multiple domain experts and due to multidisciplinary education starting from Commerce to HR to Social Work to  Legal and internships helped me understand people and experiences of dealing with them. After which I founded the practice because I saw a gap: many advisors either focus purely on litigation or purely on corporate compliance, but today’s clients (start-ups, growing companies, investors) need both and need them aligned. My early roles working with community organisations and think-tanks sharpened my understanding of business dynamics, policy frameworks and operating realities. That helped me build a practice that offers full-stack legal counsel: from corporate formation and funding to dispute resolution always with a strategic-business mindset, not just a legal one. I always say that I am a one stop solution.

    Today we are into several verticals such as FMCG, Renewable Energy, Motorsports, Chemical, Media, Logistics, Aviation, EV, Automobiles, Medical, Family Offices, Electricals, Production Engineering, Cosmetics and Dermatology Products, Franchise Businesses etc the list goes on. We advise many of these companies from starting or conceptualizing till today’s market standing. 

    Your practice spans corporate advisory, start-up guidance, litigation, and fundraising. How do you manage such diverse roles and what are the key legal compliance challenges that startups face?

    Balancing these roles is about connecting the dots, not dividing them. Every startup needs legal clarity but when they are in a journey to challenge the status quo they also see compliance checklist as status quo challenge, hence that matches its speed of growth from structuring the company to protecting IP, managing investors, and resolving conflicts. My approach has always been integrated: advisory builds the foundation, litigation protects it, and fundraising fuels it. The real challenge for startups isn’t law itself but the lack of systems informal agreements, delayed filings, and unclear ownership often create friction later. We focus on building discipline early so that compliance becomes part of the company’s DNA, not an afterthought. Law, when aligned with vision, becomes a silent accelerator of growth. 

    Handling complex corporate matters, M&A transactions or fundraising deals requires precision and strategic depth. Could you share a particularly challenging transaction and how you approached it?

    A memorable matter involved a renewable energy company that was facing termination of its government contract due to alleged non-compliance in project timelines. The penalties were enormous, and the project was just 80% complete when notices began arriving from multiple departments. Instead of reacting defensively, I advised the management to move from apology to evidence. Within days, we compiled a technical and legal dossier mapping every delay to documentary proof of supply-chain disruptions, force majeure clauses, and department-level approvals that had stalled.

    I then coordinated parallel representations before the tendering authority, invoked the contractual dispute resolution clause, and initiated a structured negotiation rather than a direct legal confrontation. By controlling the narrative with precision not aggression we secured a complete withdrawal of penalties and an extension of 90 days to complete the project.

    That case reminded me that law isn’t only about citing provisions; it’s about crafting credibility under pressure. When strategy and timing align, even a near-loss can become a reinstated victory.

    As an experienced practitioner in ADR, MSME disputes and arbitration, how do you view the evolution of Alternative Dispute Resolution in India, and what changes have you observed over your career?

    Over the years, I’ve seen ADR in India evolve from being an “alternative” to becoming the preferred mode of resolution especially for startups, MSMEs, and cross-border businesses that value time over theatrics. Technology and awareness have played a big role in this shift. Platforms like Sorted, founded by Arsh Soni, are redefining how structured, tech-enabled mediation and settlement can save businesses both money and relationships.

    When I started, arbitration was still procedural and paper-heavy. Today, virtual hearings, institutional frameworks, and enforceable mediation settlements have changed the landscape completely. What excites me most is the mindset shift entrepreneurs now see dispute resolution as part of business continuity, not as an interruption to it. My focus has been to bring that same practicality into every case: resolve early, document clearly, and protect goodwill while protecting rights. ADR in India isn’t just maturing it’s becoming a backbone of modern commercial confidence.

    Your office handles sensitive family disputes as well as investor-startup negotiations. How do you manage client expectations while ensuring ethical and strategic guidance in emotionally charged or high-stakes matters?

    In emotionally charged or high-stakes matters whether it’s a family dispute or an investor–startup standoff — I try to focus not on the noise, but on the pain points. Behind every argument lies a fear, an expectation, or a misunderstanding. My role is to uncover that root cause before crafting any legal strategy. As Dr. Carol Dweck writes in Mindset, “The view you adopt for yourself profoundly affects the way you lead your life.” I’ve seen that same principle in law — when clients shift from a fixed mindset of blame to a growth mindset of resolution, solutions emerge faster and with less collateral damage.

    I also quote from Prakash Iyer’s The Secret of Leadership, which reminds us that leadership is about staying calm when everyone else is losing balance. In my practice, that means guiding clients away from emotional reactions and towards structured, ethical decisions. Whether I’m mediating between founders or within families, I focus on clarity over chaos separating what’s personal from what’s strategic.

    At the end of the day, law isn’t about defeating the other side; it’s about restoring direction. When handled with empathy, insight, and discipline, even conflict becomes an instrument of growth.

    You play an active role in legal education, public forums and podcasts. How important is thought leadership for practising lawyers, and how do you integrate this with your daily client work?

    Thought leadership, for me, is rooted in the very genesis of law. Every act, every code, and every judgment begins as a thought. It is thought that gives birth to law because before any action is taken, it is first reasoned, questioned, and aligned with intent. Thought is the seed; law is its disciplined expression.

    I often recall the Mahabharata, which I see not as a war of weapons, but as a war for thought, a battle to uphold dharma, which, to me, is the truest essence of law. Dharma was not about victory; it was about alignment with what is just, balanced, and right, even when the path was difficult. That same philosophy guides my practice and my approach to thought leadership.

    Engaging in legal education, public forums, and podcasts is my way of continuing that dialogue of dharma to question, interpret, and refine the frameworks that govern society. Thought leadership isn’t about influence; it’s about responsibility to think deeply, act ethically, and inspire others to do the same. Law, after all, is the living embodiment of thought in pursuit of justice.

    What advice do you have for law students and young lawyers aspiring to build careers in corporate law, startup advisory or dispute resolution and what resources or practices would you recommend?

    My advice to young lawyers is simple treat law as a discipline, not a degree. Whether you’re building a career in corporate law, startup advisory, or dispute resolution, begin by understanding how businesses and people actually function. The best lawyers I know are not just good at drafting, they’re good at listening to what’s said, and what’s unsaid.

    Start with the fundamentals: company law, contracts, and evidence. Once you master the base, learn how numbers, governance, and human behavior intersect. Corporate and startup law aren’t about jargon they’re about clarity, timing, and foresight. Read judgments, not summaries. Write short, clear notes after every case you study. And most importantly, observe how strategy changes with context.

    Resources are plenty from SEBI and MCA updates to startup policy blogs and arbitration case digests, but your real growth comes from consistency. Read one new thing every day and write one page of reflection every week. Over time, that habit becomes your personal library of wisdom.

    Law rewards those who think, not those who rush. So stay curious, stay disciplined, and remember your clarity will always be your greatest currency.

    Get in touch with Khush Brahmbhatt –

    LinkedIn

  • “Intellectual Property and Technology Law don’t exist in isolation; they constantly evolve with developments in innovation, economics, and ethics.” – Anushka Sachdev, Technology, Privacy and Data protection Lawyer at Timelex, Belgium.

    “Intellectual Property and Technology Law don’t exist in isolation; they constantly evolve with developments in innovation, economics, and ethics.” – Anushka Sachdev, Technology, Privacy and Data protection Lawyer at Timelex, Belgium.

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

    Was law always your calling, or did your inclination toward it develop over time? How did NLU Delhi shape this perspective?

    I’ve always been drawn to problem-solving and the interplay between logic, language, and human behaviour. Law became my chosen path when I realised how deeply it shapes innovation, access, and justice in society. My inclination toward it certainly matured over time, especially during my years at National Law University, Delhi, which provided a rich interdisciplinary environment. My fellowships and research at the Centre for Innovation, Intellectual Property and Competition (CIIPC), Centre for Communication Governance (CCG) and seminar courses on Copyright, Technology law allowed me to explore privacy and digital technology law issues at a time when India was reimagining its digital landscape. Those experiences confirmed that my calling lay in technology and intellectual property law, where law meets innovation and ethics.

    How did you pursue your Master’s at MIPLC and how would you contrast it with the Indian legal education system?

    Pursuing an LL.M. at the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC) was both an academic and personal milestone. The admission process was highly competitive, involving a strong academic record, professional experience, motivation statement, and recommendations. What drew me to MIPLC was its small class size and its unique structure that provided a  comparative perspective on both U.S. and European Union (EU) laws, reflecting the program’s international orientation. By engaging with both systems side by side, the curriculum encourages students to develop a comparative analytical mindset, preparing them to navigate transnational IP, technology  and competition issues effectively. It offers an intense, research-driven curriculum jointly administered by the Max Planck Institute, University of Augsburg, Technical University of Munich, and George Washington University Law School. The experience was transformative- MIPLC’s international cohort fostered rigorous dialogue and cross-cultural exchange. 

    What drew you to specialize in Intellectual Property and Technology law, and how do you see this area evolving?

    My interest in IP and technology law grew organically during my undergraduate years, when I encountered the ethical and regulatory challenges that accompany innovation. During my LL.M. at the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center (MIPLC), I began exploring how IP interacts with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, data-driven innovation, and digital platforms. My master thesis on “Challenges in accessing data for AI training and solutions” sparked a deep interest in the legal frameworks governing data, algorithms, and innovation.

    This experience broadened my focus from traditional IP concepts like copyright and trademarks to the broader ecosystem of data protection, AI governance, and digital regulation. Upon returning to practice, I realized that the core principles of IP i.e. balancing innovation and access also underpin technology and data law. Working in Brussels further reinforced this transition, as I began advising on GDPR, EU AI Act, DSA, and Data Act issues. Today, I view technology law as an extension of my IP foundation where innovation meets accountability, and creativity meets compliance.

    Having worked across data protection, AI governance, and IP transactions, I’ve seen how these fields are converging. The coming years will see the EU AI Act, Data Act, and similar frameworks globally setting new precedents for accountability and fairness in innovation. Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA), 2023 aligns India’s privacy regime more closely with global standards like the GDPR while maintaining a strong focus on digital sovereignty. Alongside it, the proposed Digital India Act aims to modernize India’s tech regulation framework by replacing the two-decade-old IT Act, addressing emerging issues such as AI governance, platform accountability, and online safety in the evolving digital economy.

    What were the most valuable learnings from working with top-tier Indian firms early in your career?

    At Luthra & Luthra, I had the opportunity to work on a diverse range of matters from pharmaceutical and IP litigation to entertainment/media law. These formative years taught me the importance of precision and adaptability. I learned to approach complex regulatory issues strategically by balancing legal compliance with commercial pragmatism.

    A particularly impactful experience was challenging a government notification before the Indian Supreme Court, where I saw firsthand how constitutional principles intersect with regulatory frameworks. Another  was before the Bombay High Court when I delved into the complex interplay of rights of copyright owners, authors and copyright societies from Indian as well as international perspectives, specifically in respect of musical works and associated literary works included in a cinematograph film/sound recording. These experiences built a strong foundation in analytical thinking and advocacy, which continues to shape my approach today. 

    What motivated you to pursue an international career, and how did you navigate the transition between systems and cultures?

    An international career was both an aspiration and a natural progression of my academic and professional interests. Technology law is inherently global as data, AI, and digital technology transcends borders. My LL.M. in Germany exposed me to European frameworks like GDPR, EU Copyright law etc. which complemented my Indian experience and opened the path to working in Brussels.

    The transition came with challenges and navigating different legal systems, cultures, and languages required adaptability and openness. But it also offered invaluable perspective. Working across jurisdictions has deepened my understanding of comparative legal systems and helped me develop a nuanced, culturally sensitive advisory style. The key was staying curious, proactive, and empathetic. 

    How do you apply your experience at Timelex, particularly in EU projects on e-health, privacy, and robotics?

    At Timelex, my work involves drafting data processing, data sharing, licensing and material transfer agreements, and advising clients on data protection, data governance, artificial intelligence (AI) and other technology laws. It also involves conducting Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs), interpreting evolving instruments like the EU AI Act and other Data laws.  I also advise on European Commission projects in areas such as e-health, privacy, and AI, ensuring that innovation aligns with ethical and legal standards. This inter alia involves collaborating with multidisciplinary teams of researchers, engineers, and policymakers.

    My prior experience at Pierstone and Indian firms allows me to bring a comparative, practical lens understanding not only how regulation operates in theory but also how it can be implemented effectively across complex ecosystems. The intersection of AI, data, and health law is particularly exciting as it represents the future of responsible innovation.

    What advice would you offer to aspiring IP and technology law professionals?

    My first piece of advice would be to embrace the intersectionality of this field. Intellectual Property and Technology Law don’t exist in isolation; they constantly evolve with developments in innovation, economics, and ethics. To truly excel, it’s important to cultivate not only legal expertise but also an understanding of how technology works, why businesses innovate, and what drives policymaking. Reading beyond the law, especially in areas like data science, policy, and philosophy, helps you see the bigger picture.

    I’d also recommend engaging with practical experiences early: intern with technology firms, policy think tanks, or tech companies to understand how law operates on the ground. Writing and publishing are equally valuable as they force you to clarify your thinking and build visibility in the field.

    To stay updated, I find resources like the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), WIPO Magazine, and Max Planck Institute’s IP & Innovation reports incredibly insightful. Subscribing to newsletters such as Euractiv’s Digital Brief, or IAPP’s Daily Dashboard can also help keep you ahead of regulatory changes.

    How do you maintain work–life balance and manage mental health in a demanding field?

    For me, work-life balance is about creating intentional pauses. Law can be all-consuming, especially in high-stakes, intellectually demanding areas like technology regulation. Balance begins with discipline and self-awareness. I make it a point to structure my day, prioritize deep work, and set realistic goals instead of trying to do everything at once. I also ensure I take time to disconnect-reading, travelling, hiking, social dancing or simply spending time outdoors helps me reset and gain perspective.. 

    My background in classical dance has been especially grounding. Dance instilled in me mindfulness, rhythm, and patience, all of which translate beautifully into professional life. It reminds me that growth is a gradual, continuous process rather than a race. 

    Maintaining a structured routine, regular exercise, and mindfulness practices has been crucial. I also believe in fostering open conversations around mental health within the profession. Law can be high-pressure, but acknowledging that and creating supportive networks whether through mentorship or peer discussions makes a huge difference.

    Get in touch with Anushka Sachdev –

  • “In litigation, you may not win every matter, but if your effort and ethics remain uncompromised, growth is inevitable.” – Kartik Rai, Associate Partner at Rai & Rai Partners, Law Offices.

    “In litigation, you may not win every matter, but if your effort and ethics remain uncompromised, growth is inevitable.” – Kartik Rai, Associate Partner at Rai & Rai Partners, Law Offices.

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

    Sir, you’ve built a distinguished career in litigation and dispute resolution over the past nine years. What initially drew you toward advocacy, and how did your early experiences shape your understanding of courtroom dynamics and the art of persuasion?

    Since childhood, I was quite clear that I wanted to pursue litigation, my father was into it, so the courtroom atmosphere was something I grew up around. When I began working with Mr. Sanjay Jain, Senior Advocate and former ASG, I truly learned what advocacy means in practice. He never lost his calm, even in the most charged hearings, and always looked for a balanced, midway approach to convince the judge rather than taking an extreme stand.

    I remember during the AgustaWestland bail matter, where Senior Advocates namely Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Dayan Krishnan, and Mr. Mohit Mathur appeared for the Petitioners and Mr. Jain argued with remarkable composure, relying purely on law and facts, and still managed to persuade the court. That experience taught me that true advocacy lies not in volume, but in conviction, clarity, and restraint and values that continue to guide me in every case I handle today.

    You began your professional journey handling complex Money Laundering and UAPA cases. How did working on such intricate and high-stakes matters early in your career influence your legal reasoning, discipline, and approach to strategy building?

    Working on complex matters like Money Laundering and UAPA cases early on really shaped the way I approach law. These matters required a lot of in-depth research, especially since UAPA was a relatively new statute at the time. It pushed me to understand the law from its roots and build arguments around evolving interpretations. When you deal with such intricate issues early in your career, you naturally develop a strong grip on smaller issues later. It also taught me the importance of being thorough, disciplined, and strategic because in high-stakes cases, every detail counts.

    From assisting on landmark public law cases to now leading high-value commercial and arbitration disputes, how would you describe your evolution as a litigator and the key experiences that have shaped your professional philosophy?

    It’s been quite a journey. Starting with landmark public law cases gave me a strong foundation in constitutional principles and the importance of fairness and accountability in governance. Those early experiences taught me how every case, no matter how big or small, impacts real people and public institutions.

    As I moved into commercial and arbitration matters, I began to see litigation from a different lens, one that focuses more on strategy, precision, and practical outcomes for clients. Leading high-value disputes has helped me evolve from just being a researcher and drafter to someone who can think on their feet, anticipate the other side’s moves, and guide a team toward a clear strategy.

    Overall, I’d say my professional philosophy has been shaped by a balance of both the patience and purpose I learned from public law, and the structure and strategy that commercial litigation demands.

    You’ve represented several major PSUs in significant commercial disputes and arbitrations. Could you share one particularly challenging matter that stands out to you and how you approached its resolution both strategically and practically?

    One matter that really stands out was an arbitration where I represented BSNL against a Malaysian company, which was being represented jointly by a Singapore-based firm and an Indian law firm. The case arose from BSNL inviting Expressions of Interest (EOI) for associations with external agencies to generate revenue from mobile-based advertising and other related value-added services.

    It was a complex and challenging case, both in terms of technical issues and cross-jurisdictional coordination. Despite the odds, we not only successfully defended BSNL’s interests but also secured a favorable award on our counterclaim. It was a deeply satisfying outcome because it required meticulous strategy, detailed preparation, and consistent teamwork. That case, among many others, reinforced my belief that in arbitration, success comes from preparation, clarity, and persistence.

    Your practice spans arbitration, land acquisition, and commercial litigation. What aspects of arbitration do you find most intellectually stimulating, and how do you view the future of institutional arbitration in India and abroad?

    I find construction arbitration particularly stimulating, as it involves complex commercial and technical issues, often requiring a deep understanding of contracts, timelines, and project execution. Both in India and abroad, construction arbitration is witnessing significant growth, and I believe this field is emerging as a major area of practice.

    Regarding institutional arbitration, the future looks very promising. The Government of India has taken several steps to strengthen the dispute resolution framework and promote Ease of Doing Business, including legislative interventions to improve the enforcement of contracts. The Department of Legal Affairs is considering further amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, aimed at boosting institutional arbitration, reducing court intervention, and ensuring timely conclusion of proceedings. Additionally, the Ministry of Finance has issued an Office Memorandum promoting institutional arbitration specifically for CPSEs, PSBs, and Government companies, which further reinforces the emphasis on structured and efficient dispute resolution.

    Overall, I see arbitration evolving into a more efficient, structured, and internationally aligned system, which is exciting both professionally and intellectually.

    Having represented both PSU and private clients, what key differences have you observed in their approach to dispute resolution, and how do you tailor your strategies accordingly?

    With a PSU, arbitration is often treated as a formal, drawn‑out process, the state backing, lesser commercial urgency and internal culture mean delays are tolerated and mediation is increasingly preferred. 

    On the other hand, a private client is driven by commercial pressures to resolve disputes faster, uses institutional or international arbitration, and tends to keep the process aggressive and time‑sensitive.

    A PSU often treats arbitration as a background process because of government backing, less commercial urgency and internal culture, employees may be less alert to the complexities of documentation or fast invocation, and the dispute may be allowed to drag. In contrast, a private client is typically more commercially focused, more proactive about documentation and procedural steps, and more driven to resolve quickly (to free up capital, reduce cost and preserve relationships).

    Reflecting on your journey from interning at top firms to independently arguing complex matters, what have been some defining challenges or turning points in your career, and what guiding principle has consistently kept you motivated?

    In my early years, after leaving the office of the Ld. ASG and joining my father’s practice, I was asked to argue a criminal appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. I contended that since the medical report did not show ‘grievous hurt’, the title to Section 326A IPC – which refers to ‘grievous hurt by use of acid’ – meant that the injury must necessarily be grievous and hence 326A should not apply. 

    Ultimately, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in *Maqbool v. State of U.P. (2018) held that “merely because the title to Section 326A of the IPC speaks about grievous hurt by use of acid, it is not a requirement under the section that the injuries caused should be invariably grievous.” 

    The Court overruled the earlier decisions of the Rajasthan and Madras High Courts on that point. 

     As a result, the judgment became reportable and serves as a leading precedent on the interpretation of Sections 326A and 326B.

    What has consistently kept me motivated and is a simple guiding principle is that there’s no substitute for hard work and integrity. In litigation, you may not win every matter, but if your effort and ethics remain uncompromised, growth is inevitable.

    Finally, what advice would you offer to law students and young advocates who aspire to build a strong foundation in litigation and arbitration? Are there any specific skills, resources, or habits you believe are vital for excelling in this field, especially in arbitration practice?

    For young lawyers who aspire to excel in arbitration and litigation, mastery of the fundamentals such as building a strong foundational knowledge in your chosen domain and sharpening your legal drafting and writing skills is indispensable. But beyond that, the focus must also be on developing the art of cross‑examination: understanding how to ask the right question, lead a witness, expose inconsistencies, and maintain control of testimony in real time. A successful career in litigation (and in arbitration where witness examination still matters) demands consistent learning, relentless hard work, resilience in the face of setbacks, sharp critical thinking, and above all, patience. By combining these competencies, rigorous preparation, adept cross‑examination, and steady professional growth, you set yourself apart in both domestic and global arenas.

    How do you maintain a balance between your professional commitments and personal life? What are some hobbies or activities that help you unwind and manage stress during demanding times?

    Over the years, I’ve realised that staying committed to one’s personal life actually helps you excel professionally. It’s the support and presence of family and friends, along with those timely meetups, that keep you grounded and refreshed allowing you to return to work with renewed focus and energy.

    Managing stress has indeed become a major concern in the legal profession, and it’s important not to let it take a toll on our health. I make it a point to take out time to play badminton regularly, and I also ensure that I participate in the sports activities organised by our Bar Associations from time to time. These moments of recreation really help me unwind and maintain a healthy balance between work and life.

    Get in touch with Kartik Rai –

    LinkedIn

  • “The importance of legal scholarship can be seen not only in academic growth but also through a positive change in law.” – Shivani Vij, Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India.

    “The importance of legal scholarship can be seen not only in academic growth but also through a positive change in law.” – Shivani Vij, Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India.

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

    Your academic journey from graduating at the top of your class at NLIU Bhopal to completing the BCL at Oxford on a Chevening Scholarship has been exceptional. How have these contrasting academic environments shaped your legal reasoning and influenced your professional practice?

    My graduation at NLIU was an intense five-year trimester. NLIU was heavily student run, and this gave me the confidence to take charge. I was at the helm of co-curricular activities, in addition to academia. It also gave me space to grow as a young law student and have an opinion for the first time on anything contemporary or legal.

    NLIU will always feel like home, and I am proud of the strong foundation it gave me, but perhaps it faces the same challenge of the Indian legal education in its narrow/ low focus on independent research and writing. I strongly believe that a system that focuses on application of law and encourages research rather than exams may be better suited for litigation. Part of the problem is a dearth of practitioners as teachers in Indian law schools, unlike med schools. This is extremely relevant for procedural subjects.

    So, while I was at the top of my class in NLIU, I found myself at the bottom of my cohort in Oxford. BCL’s perspective on what a good essay should look like was very different from mine. Clarity of thought was given utmost priority. And though this sounds basic, I began viewing the ability to begin with a proposition of law, develop an argument and reason it out, a skill worth developing. Only later I realised this also reflected a good draft of a synopsis of a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court. Another area where the BCL broadened my perspective was comparative law. Many cases in the Supreme Court deal with constitutional challenges and look outside the Indian law, such as in anti-discrimination and administrative law. 

    The time spent by practitioners in teaching full time courses; for instance, Kings Counsels in the UK is also a big advantage. They regularly take out time for closed group discussions with two-three students and give individual attention to each essay. This interaction is truly phenomenal. 

    One last thing that I continue to reap the benefits of is the Oxford community. My friends at the programme are very dear to me and the university did everything to make this happen. Most of them, who went on to become barristers and solicitors, are still in touch with me and we often share our work experiences in the midst of remembering our time at the university. On the lighter side, the joy of studying in a Hogwarts styled city, with a library at every corner, and the beautifully designed lush green colleges, is simply unparallelled.

    Not many people start their litigation career with government practice. How was it working in the chamber of an Additional Standing Counsel at the Delhi High Court, very early in your career?

    I worked with Adv. Gautam Narayan (now a designated senior) for about two and a half years, when he was on the Delhi Govt panel. My experience in his chamber was very enriching, yet very demanding. The sheer volume of work one is expected to handle at a government chamber overwhelms you. And dealing with government departments for instructions each day can be very time consuming, with their usual red tape. Few other things that come handy with a government panel is to face constant flak from judges for the slow pace of work, not filing responses promptly etc.

    However, often less spoken about, is the ability to drive change and enable relief as a government counsel, which makes the job fulfilling. Not all cases are adversarial and many times the Court asks for assistance from government lawyers to reach authorities and implement orders. Cases on prison reform, bonded labour and environment protection are best examples of this. As part of the chamber, we were able to facilitate good green work in the Delhi Ridge and played a part in implementing the Delhi School Education Act.

    I consider myself extremely lucky to find a chamber like this and a boss like him, who taught me two simple yet difficult qualities of grit and discipline, that I carry with me till date. 

    Having worked with some of the most respected Senior Advocates and been involved in landmark cases, what have been your most formative learnings from chambers practice at the Supreme Court level?

    Today, the Supreme Court today is not just a constitutional Court but has taken the colour of a Court of Appeal with over twenty statutes with direct appeals from tribunals. To add to this, the bread and butter of a Supreme Court lawyer are special leave petitions which keep the Court fairly occupied. 

    I believe, to have a voice in such a busy appellate court, four things are important: 

    • A good draft is half the battle won.
    • A question of law gives you good ground to argue.
    • Pointed answers to queries makes the Court’s job easy.
    • Integrity goes a long way. Admitting the weakness in your case makes you more amenable to the Court.

    Though the Supreme Court largely remains a senior driven court, a young lawyer who can put her point across in a crisp manner, gauge the reaction of the bench and respond accordingly, can do very well.

    What motivated you to establish your own practice, and what initial hurdles did you face in doing so? What vision did you have for your independent practice from the outset?

    When I left Khaitan in 2018 and moved to litigation, my goal was to become an arguing counsel and have my own chamber someday. The power of a good counsel and her ability to move the bench attracted me. This came from my short stint at the Bombay High Court as part of the Khaitan IP team. 

    I started litigation in Delhi but struggled with its pace and uncertainty of work. The procedural paraphernalia to filing cases also irritated me as a junior. However, on most good days and some bad days, the goal remained firm. Once I stood at the podium and was able to have a conversation with the judge, I felt powerful. Even thought to myself, this is why I joined law school. I thoroughly enjoyed working in both my previous chambers, but I very much looked forward to arguing my own matters and the choice of going independent seemed inevitable. 

    In the last couple of years, I began taking up my own work. Initially, the work was sporadic and low paying, but slowly it’s picking up. A big decision was to decide the right time to take up an office space and keep a clerk. As significant recurrent costs for a young lawyer, this is an important decision to make.

    I must add that Gopal Sir & Haripriya Ma’am (senior advocates), who I worked with for over three years, have been instrumental in this journey. Not only did they help me with my initial cases, but also gave me opportunities to argue in the Supreme Court, even against senior advocates. Their trust and support in my moments of doubt continues to push me to do better. It also reminds me that someone with similar experiences and struggles came through with flying colours, and so can I. A good mentor is your best resource.

    At VIJ Law Offices, your matters span a wide legal spectrum from objecting to claim withdrawals in insolvency proceedings to criminal appeals from convictions and service matters. How do you manage such a diverse caseload, and which case has been the most intellectually or strategically demanding for you?

    As a (very) young chamber, I have tried to cultivate a practice with a wide range of civil and criminal cases. Partly, this stems from my exposure in my previous chambers to a comprehensive range of vires challenge, service law, company matters, land acquisition matters, arbitration, you name it. Soon enough, I gained the confidence to build arguments for any new point of law for any new case. Another factor which played a role is the stage of my career. Right now, I feel I should say ‘yes’ to each and every matter, without the worry of being branded a commercial or a criminal lawyer. A jack of all trades might not be a master of none for young lawyers.

    In my experience, criminal matters such as appeals from convictions, death sentence and bail, though not the most lucrative, require the most amount of work. Since they affect life and liberty of citizens, I find them the most laborious and emotionally challenging. The most intellectually demanding area, however, remains constitutional law. I have been fortunate to work on a spectrum of constitutional issues spanning from reservation law and parliamentary privileges to abrogation of Article 370. Though the interpretation of the Constitution is similar to a statute, but the basis of challenge of an amendment is entirely different and rests on the basic structure doctrine. The process of understanding the history of our Constitution, discerning the basic structure, and testing a constitutional amendment against it is both invigorating and challenging. Once you’ve done this, you may encounter an entirely different constitutional issue next time, such as the one concerning the CEC appointment – can the Courts fill a vacuum that arises due to inaction by the Parliament under the Constitution?  

    You’ve contributed actively through writings in The Hindu, Oxford blogs, and the NLUD Journal. What role do you believe legal scholarship plays in shaping both jurisprudence and public understanding/ change of the law?

    Immense importance. Writing is thinking, and I wish I had started before. As lawyers, we must acknowledge that articulation is our biggest asset. 

    As they say, laws are as good as the people implementing them, and lawyers have a big role to play here. With a firsthand experience of how matters are argued, how legislations work and courts interpret them, we can contribute to legal scholarship with our practical experience. Sr. Adv. Datar’s short articles on Article 14 are a great example of clarity and knowledge that comes with experience. 

    Writing also contributes greatly to drafting a good petition. Though journal publications are more valuable for their in-depth research, writing for newspapers has taught me the art of putting things simply. 

    The importance of legal scholarship can be seen not only in academic growth but also through a positive change in law. The Supreme Court in Navtej Singh (decriminalising homosexuality) and Lt. Col. Nishtha (permanent commission) was influenced by academic writings on indirect discrimination/ disparate impact and developed this as new dimensions of equality under Art. 14. Any new challenge on discrimination would now examine the disparate impact of a gender neutral provision on a particular group of the society.

    Clearing the Advocate-on-Record examination is a commendable feat. What responsibilities accompany this designation, and how has it influenced your litigation strategy and client engagement?

    Thank you. On a lighter note, I am very glad about my AOR results because the exam reminded me how difficult it is to sit down with a pen and paper for 3 hours, in the fear of time running out and the possibility of not making it through as a lawyer with 5-6 years of practice. The fear is real!!

    In my opinion, an Advocate-on-Record is very valuable, both for the client and the court. Right from the first client interaction, to drafting and filing the petition, reasoning with the registry (the most difficult part) and appearing and arguing in the court, an AOR can be a one stop shop to see a matter through in the Supreme Court. An AOR also holds good ground with the client to suggest which senior counsel should be engaged for which kind of matters. Being an AOR also comes with great responsibility. The court holds an AOR accountable for anything regarding the matter and the party, good or bad. When a senior counsel is unable to appear or reach for a matter, the AOR may be asked to address the Court. So, an AOR can easily be said to be the most important lawyer in the Supreme Court today. 

    I must add that historically the perception of an AOR was quite different. AORs often filed matters for other lawyers, without being involved in the process. Typically, lawyers who were solicitors and not attuned to arguing in the Court also chose to be AORs. Slowly and steadily this perception is changing.

    Being an AOR has certainly contributed to my practice. Clients and fellow lawyers, who may have seen me in Court with my previous bosses, feel confident to approach me directly for new cases. I believe clients also get a sense of satisfaction that ‘one lawyer’ would handle their case till the end.

    What advice would you offer to students and young lawyers, given your diverse and global perspective? What resources or habits would you recommend to help them stay sharp and build a well-rounded legal career?

    A simple advice would be – trust your gut to choose right and then trust the process. 

    Today, law has opened many doors for young graduates besides litigation and corporate. More young lawyers are choosing tech, policy, teaching or management roles where a law degree comes handy. One should be free to choose their own path without judgement. When I decided to pursue my LLM, I was told it was a waste of time for litigation and would in fact put me behind my peers. Many corporate firms would also say so and even discount your masters’ experience altogether. Keeping all aside, I decided to pursue the LLM/ BCL in a difficult covid year and would never discount that experience or trade it elsewhere.

    Besides, something that has helped me build a well-rounded career has been teaching. I understand it may not be enjoyable for everyone, but a fresh exchange of ideas to a deep dive into law, can open our horizons like no other. Teaching a course on bail this semester has made me realise some fallacies in our system, which I wasn’t privy to or hadn’t given much thought as a lawyer.

    Lastly, a piece of advice which is more suited to the legal profession than any other is – to persevere. Whichever path one may choose, the road to a successful lawyer is a long one. While I am still on this road, I’ve realized that I have been able to overcome the difficulties I faced in my career early on. For instance, understanding the court roster, procedure, complex matters, all seemed too alien when I started practicing in 2018. There was an urge to turn to more lucrative opportunities and turn down the sweat and blood of litigation. But perseverance kept me going and hopefully gets me through.

    Get in touch with Shivani Vij –

    LinkedIn

  • “Litigation is a marathon where the efforts that one puts in during the initial years yield results in the long run.” – Ramakrishnan S, Advocate on Record and Principal Attorney at Shiva & Co. Advocates.

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

    What initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? Was it a personal passion or did your father’s legacy in the legal field play a defining role in shaping your decision?

    Two reasons I suppose. The first being that my father was a lawyer as well. Though I didn’t know much in my younger years about the profession, just seeing him in the blazer and robe felt classy and had a certain aura. The second was that I didn’t quite like maths and science as subjects during my schooling days so much so that after Class 10 I immediately switched to Humanities for Class 11 and 12. On a lighter note, they say ‘karma is a boomerang’. I managed to avoid anything to do with Maths and Science for a good 7 years post Class 10 but both of them resurfaced once I stepped into my legal career and have been part of my journey since courtesy the matters that I handle. 

    You took over Shiva & Co. Advocates in 2008 at just 23. How did you adapt to the challenges of leading a full-fledged law firm so early in your career, and what were the key lessons from that transition?

    Circumstances forced me to take over the firm at the age of 23. I had just completed my LL.B from University Law College, Bengaluru in mid-2007 and was on track to do my Masters in Law having secured an offer both in London School of Economics and National University Singapore. Unfortunately, I lost my father in March 2008. Shiva & Co. Advocates was my father’s baby which he had started in the year 1988 and I did not want to see it shut down because he was no more, hence I immediately took over the reins of the firm. The challenges were aplenty since I was a complete rookie with an elementary knowledge of the law and no practical experience. My father, due to his sheer hardwork and dedication had become a successful and well-known lawyer and had built up a sizable practice and the nature of matters that he worked on towards his last few years involved high value and high stakes. My first few days after taking over the firm were spent in reaching out to Clients and asking them if they wanted to continue with the firm or wanted the briefs to be returned. The exercise rendered me almost briefless since Clients understandably did not want to entrust such high value and high stake matters to a rookie Counsel. My father’s junior colleagues at the chamber had moved on post his demise. The only staff I was left with was my father’s chauffeur, court clerk and stenographer. It took some time but slowly, brick by brick, with the able assistance of my support staff, we put things together. I was fortunate enough that in a couple of months, two clients of my father, one an individual and another a company in the travel sector gave me my first briefs, one being a landlord-tenant dispute and the other a consumer matter. The faith and encouragement that they reposed in me helped me find my footing and since then there has been no looking back. One thing that I never gave up on even during those early days when I was brief less, visiting Courts and reading up on the law. In terms of lessons or learnings, I would only say that what helped me during those early years were certain key aspects – mental fortitude to run the firm, come what may, a thirst to succeed in the profession, constant reading of the law and observing matters across various Courts. I always tell my junior colleagues that for a Lawyer, his/her eyes, ears and tongue are the most important sense organs. Eyes to observe, ears to hear and tongue to voice out an appropriate response after the brain has processed all the information and the right combination of this is what creates magic in Court. 

    Your firm handles a broad spectrum of work, from civil and criminal litigation to real estate and corporate matters. How do you manage and balance these diverse practice areas while maintaining quality and consistency across them?

    It comes down to putting in place an effective strategy. Over the years, I have had the assistance of my junior colleagues at the office who have ably assisted me in my matters. The majority of them joined right out of college and have left the firm after being part of it for a considerable amount of time and are doing well for themselves. They are spread across litigation, corporate, in-house and one of them is even a Judge in the Trial Court. The moment a brief is received, a short note is prepared on the facts of the case and the issues involved by my colleagues which is followed by a preliminary discussion post which tasks are assigned. My junior colleagues, over the years, have due to their efforts, handled various stages of a case on their own be it cross-examination, final arguments or arguments on interim reliefs and I am extremely happy to see their progress. As long as the work is process driven and each member of the firm recognises his/her roles and responsibilities, quality and consistency can be maintained effectively. 

    You completed the 40-hour Mediator Training Workshop jointly conducted by OCMC, NLSIU, and ICADR. How has this training influenced your approach to dispute resolution and client management in litigation and ADR matters?

    Honestly, I did the course only because Mediation was a buzzword then. We had a good set of trainers who invested time over two days to teach us all the ins and outs of Mediation. The workshop helped in understanding the essence and effectiveness of the process if done right away. In addition, a key takeaway for me personally was that it helped in shaking off some rusty bits in my approach towards client meetings and helped in having a more nuanced approach towards the same. Considering the explosion of litigation and pendency in the Courts, Mediation is certainly a viable tool that requires a bit more than a nudge in order to make it a preferred dispute resolution mechanism. The Mediation Act and the setting up of the Mediation Association of India are steps in the right direction.

    You have been actively involved in arbitration and other ADR mechanisms. How do you perceive the growing importance of ADR in India’s legal ecosystem, and what role does it play in your firm’s overall strategy?

    Arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism has evolved over the years. Despite periodic amendments to the law, there is still a substantial portion of the process and provisions in the Act where there is Court intervention. Some developments such as fixing a timeframe for disposal, restricting the scope for appeal etc. have helped in speeding the process to some extent, however India as a destination for Arbitration still has a long way to go. There is definitely hope though. I recently attended an Arbitration conference in Mumbai and was pleasantly surprised at the interest shown by arbitrators and academicians from outside India regarding developments related to Arbitration Law in India. Online Dispute Resolution has also taken off in a big way in India and we are seeing multiple ODR platforms opening up. The impetus for Arbitration can also be seen as recent as this month when the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh has announced the setting up of an International Arbitration Center in Vishakapatnam. On the flipside, Arbitration is still considered as a closed door club where only the rich can have proper access to the process by engaging the top lawyers in the country. This is due to the fact that the costs involved are steep and out of reach for most small and medium businesses who as a result continue to prefer the traditional litigation route despite its anomalies. The MSME Act and the Commercial Courts Act have provided some succour to these small and medium businesses with regard to speedy disposal of disputes. ADR as mechanisms are definitely required considering the docket explosion in Courts however they do need refinement on some key aspects. 

    Clearing the Advocate-on-Record examination is a significant professional achievement. Could you share your preparation journey, the challenges faced, and how this qualification has impacted your practice at the Supreme Court?

    As is with a few events that have occurred in my life, taking up the AoR exam was on a whim since a friend of mine had also decided to take it up. Despite having a decent practice in Bangalore in all of those years, I had never set foot in the Supreme Court for any matter and it irked me to an extent. I blame myself partly for having become too comfortable with my work in Bangalore to think of expanding my horizons. The Covid-19 pandemic was the time that curiosity got the better of me and since there was not much else to do, I decided to take a crack at the exams. Considering the mandatory 1 year training had to be done during the time of the pandemic, it involved a lot of self-study and listening to lectures online. To an extent, the years of practise prior to taking up the exam also helped me greatly since I had the benefit of practical exposure in the Courts. The most important tip I would say is that one would necessarily have to practice writing regularly since each paper is 3 hours and the questions require you to write a fair bit depending on the marks allotted for each of them. Overall, if one has put in his/her time in keeping themselves updated on the law and has been observant in the Courts, it would go a long way in making the exam relatively easier. Clearing the exams certainly was a high point in my career and it opened the portals of the Supreme Court to me. I have been blessed that in a period of about 3 years of becoming an AoR, I have handled a handful of matters in the Supreme Court that I have argued myself. Having a taste of all three Courts that is Trial Court, High Court and Supreme Court has provided me with the opportunity to further sharpen my tools since each Court mandates a different manner and approach towards putting forth one’s case. 

    You have authored articles published in the Karnataka Law Journal and SCC. How do you view the importance of legal writing, publication, and thought leadership in shaping the career of a practicing advocate?

    I assume writing, teaching etc. are inevitable extensions for a lawyer. At some point, the thought of publishing one’s views on a legal issue arises. At the same time, writing heavily tests your skills in presenting your thoughts in a sublime yet easily comprehensible manner. It involves hard labour since once you’ve zeroed in on a topic, you need to sift through copious amounts of literature right from commentaries, articles, case laws, online lectures etc. and condense the same into as minimal words as possible, in simple english, without compromising on the essence of the topic. Every lawyer at some point ought to give writing a shot since it not only enhances knowledge on the subject but also provides fellow lawyers/readers with an opportunity to ponder upon and debate on the same.

    With extensive appearances before various courts, tribunals, and authorities in Bangalore, what has been one of the most challenging matters for you?

    It would be difficult to pick a single matter since each matter comes with its own set of challenges and nuances. I would admit though that once you handle a few matters on a specific area of law, the briefs that you receive thereafter become easier to handle. For any lawyer, the most challenging matter would be the first matter that he/she handles in each Court/Tribunal since each of them require different approaches right from drafting the petitions/responses to processes involved to the submissions that have to be made. The majority of the lawyers would find the first appearance/submission in Court nerve-wrecking even if it is as small as seeking an adjournment or a passover. Likewise the first full-fledged submission, be it arguments on an interim application or final arguments or the first cross-examination to be conducted would be equally challenging. 

    Having built a diverse and successful practice, what advice would you offer to young lawyers aiming to excel in litigation, real estate, or multidisciplinary legal practice while taking on leadership roles early in their careers?

    As cliché as it may sound, the profession extracts a lot out of you. It requires a lot of dedication and continuous upskilling of your craft. Litigation is a marathon where the efforts that one puts in during the initial years yield results in the long run. One must keep themselves appraised with the latest developments not only in law but events happening around the country and the world. I would recommend freshers to dabble in as many different kinds of matters that one can do in the first few years before attempting to set out on focussing on niche areas. Thousands of lawyers graduate every year hence it is necessary that you start identifying and fine-tuning your core competence and work on your shortcomings. The profession, though unforgiving, is equally rewarding over time when results will bring in the expected monetary dividends as well in addition to recognition. Occasional slip-ups are part and parcel however what matters is that you learn from them and don’t repeat it. As regards leadership roles, I would suggest that you find a good mentor/senior to guide you the first few years and then plunge into having your own practice. It is important to find a good footing before venturing on your own. While I did not have a particular person who I could call a mentor, I have vastly benefitted from observing and interacting with multiple seniors and juniors in the profession alike and this is also something that one must inculcate since healthy conversations provide you with new perspectives. 

    What is the guiding philosophy or motto that has consistently inspired you throughout your journey? How has it shaped your approach to the profession, and what vision do you hold for your future practice?

    For me Shiva & Co. Advocates is an homage to my family who have been there for me every step of the way and allows me to be focussed on my career. Having a spirit of never giving up builds that drive and focus that you need to get far in the profession. One should also have the hunger to succeed at all times and strive to be better every single day. Needless to say honesty, loyalty and integrity are a fundamental and integral part of the profession and helps you go a long way yielding long-term dividends. This profession is not a race but a marathon. These are some principles or philosophies that have helped me along the way. As for my vision for the future, I am a firm believer in taking things one day at a time and giving it my fullest, the results are a mere formality. 

    Get in touch with Ramakrishnan S –

  • “At the end of the day, I truly believe that we become lawyers in the real sense only when we stand beside those who genuinely need us.” – Priyanka Borana, Advocate at Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.

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

    You began your academic journey with a background in commerce and CS before pursuing your LL.B. What inspired this transition, and how did your early education shape your understanding of law?

    Honestly, law wasn’t something I had planned from the beginning. I was sitting with my mother one day, completely confused about what to do next. I told her I wasn’t really interested in commerce, and she laughed and said, “Hamare ghar mein koi lawyer nahi hai, aur tumhara toh waise bhi ladai-jhagde ka dimag chalta hai — law kar lo.” It was said jokingly, but somehow it stayed with me. The very next thing I knew, I had taken admission in Madhusudan Law College.

    Once I started studying law, I realised how naturally it connected with the way I think — questioning, reasoning, and standing up for what feels right. My commerce and CS background gave me a habit of thinking logically and paying attention to detail, which later helped a lot in legal drafting and understanding case records. Looking back, that light-hearted moment with my mother actually became the turning point of my life.

    During your initial years of college and early practice, what key lessons or experiences prepared you for active litigation? Was pursuing litigation something you had always envisioned for yourself?

    To be very honest, during college I was never one of those overly serious law students. I used to bunk classes quite often and sit under the neem tree with friends. I was very active in co-curricular activities- debates, events, organizing functions, but attending regular lectures was never really my thing. At that time, I hadn’t even imagined that I would actually take up litigation one day.

    Things changed when I moved to Jodhpur in 2016. In 2018, I joined the trial court, and honestly, it was a tough beginning. I had no friends here, no contacts, and I didn’t know how I was going to find my place in a completely new professional circle. Those initial months: almost eight to nine, were all about learning by observing and surviving through small but meaningful experiences.

    Later, I shifted to the High Court, and that’s when I realised that maybe this was exactly where I was meant to be. Looking back now, I feel choosing litigation was one of the best decisions I’ve made. It challenged me, shaped me, and made me value the strength that comes from starting all over again in a new city, purely on your own effort.

    You have been practicing at the Rajasthan High Court across diverse areas such as commercial law, property disputes, arbitration, and criminal matters. How did you build versatility across these domains and manage all matters effectively?

    Over time, I’ve handled a variety of matters, from commercial and property disputes to arbitration and criminal cases, but if I’m being honest, criminal litigation is my real zone. It naturally suits my personality. I’ve always been someone who believes in standing firm, not getting intimidated, and saying things as they are. That fearless side of me connected very well with the criminal side of practice.

    In criminal law, you learn to read people, their behaviour, mindset, and what drives them. Understanding how a criminal thinks or reacts is not just about law; it’s about human psychology, and that’s what makes it so fascinating. It gives you a different kind of edge and maturity as a lawyer.

    For female lawyers especially, criminal litigation adds a certain strength to your personality, it teaches you how to hold your ground in tough spaces. Over time, I’ve realised that while I enjoy working across different branches of law, criminal litigation brings out the most fearless and analytical version of me.

    You have also been actively contributing as a pro bono lawyer. What motivates your involvement in public service, and how have these experiences shaped your understanding of access to justice?

    I’ve always felt that the purpose of being a lawyer shouldn’t just be limited to luxury litigation or earning money. Somewhere, we tend to forget that the law was made for people who actually need its protection the most. Around my own neighbourhood, I’ve seen so many individuals who quietly suffer because they don’t even know their rights, they simply don’t have the awareness or resources to seek help.

    That’s why I take my legal aid work very seriously. The Legal Services Authority often appoints me in such cases, and I consider it both a duty and an honour. One case that really stayed with me was an MTP (Medical Termination of Pregnancy) matter involving a minor rape victim from a very difficult background. She was completely unaware of the legal process, and time was crucial. Managing that case made me realise how powerful our profession can be when used with empathy and urgency.

    At the end of the day, I truly believe that we become lawyers in the real sense only when we stand beside those who genuinely need us. The real purpose of this profession lies in restoring someone’s faith in the law. When people see that justice can actually protect them, their trust in the system grows stronger, and that trust, once earned, is the most meaningful reward a lawyer can ever receive.

    As a panel advocate for the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, what has been one of the most challenging cases you’ve handled, and how did you navigate it?

    Every legal aid matter has its own challenges, but one case that I will never forget was before a Division Bench. I was representing the respondent father in a matter involving a 9-month-old baby who had been given in adoption without informing the natural mother.

    Even though I was appearing for the respondent, the case affected me deeply. When the court finally directed that the baby be handed back to the natural mother, the entire courtroom turned emotional. On one side stood the mother who had given birth, and on the other, the woman who had cared for the baby and nurtured her for months. Watching both of them break down was heart-wrenching.

    That day reminded me that law isn’t always about right or wrong, sometimes it stands between two truths, two emotions, and two lives. Even the Hon’ble Bench remarked that while everyone felt the pain, law is law. That moment taught me that as lawyers, we must carry empathy with firmness, to feel the human side of justice while still upholding the legal one.

    Alongside your legal practice, you have written articles for reputed publications on issues such as gender equity and the experiences of women in law. What inspired you to explore these themes, and how do you see the role of women evolving within the legal profession?

    Whatever I’ve written so far has come from what I’ve actually seen and felt inside courtrooms, not from theory, but from daily experiences. I’ve seen how small things, which often go unnoticed, slowly create barriers for women in this profession. Everyone talks about gender equity, but very few actually address the uncomfortable truths behind it.

    Through my writing, I’ve tried to reflect what many women advocates silently feel but don’t say out loud. These are thoughts that belong to all of us — I’ve just tried to put them into words. Because if we don’t speak, how will anyone know where the problem truly lies?

    Yes, things are changing, but the pace is slow. Still, I genuinely believe that women are no longer just part of the legal system — we’re shaping it, questioning it, and giving it new meaning. And if my articles can make even one person pause and think about these realities, I feel I’ve done something worthwhile as both a lawyer and a writer.

    You have represented clients before multiple forums, including the Rajasthan High Court, Commissions, and Tribunals, and have also appeared in various Public Interest Litigations. What is your perspective on the evolving scope of PILs and their significance for the legal community?

    Public Interest Litigation, in its true sense, is a beautiful concept — it allows the court to hear those who otherwise have no voice. I’ve been fortunate to work as amicus curiae in matters like the Nari Niketan case and the suo motu matter related to stray animals, both of which dealt with genuine issues that directly impacted public welfare. These cases made me realise how meaningful PILs can be when handled with sincerity — they push real change, bring accountability, and ensure that the law reaches beyond individuals to society at large.

    But the truth is, over time, I’ve also seen how this concept is being diluted. Many people now file PILs without proper groundwork or genuine cause — just to gain attention or to keep their names in circulation. Because of such misuse, even genuine petitions sometimes don’t get the seriousness they deserve. That’s the sad part — when the noise of the unnecessary hides the voice of the necessary.

    As lawyers, we carry a responsibility to preserve the sanctity of PILs. If we treat it with respect and care, it can remain one of the strongest instruments of justice in our system. For me, being appointed amicus and working on causes that truly matter has been both humbling and grounding — it reminds me that law is at its best when it serves humanity, not headlines.

    With experience spanning civil, criminal, and commercial practice, what moments have most shaped your perspective toward the practice of law?

    When I look back, I feel even small incidents can shape your entire perspective as a lawyer. I still remember one moment from my early days in practice. I had just joined my senior’s office, and one day, my matter was listed before a Division Bench. I requested an adjournment because I didn’t have the file — the staff had taken it, assuming it wouldn’t be listed.

    But the court refused and said, “No adjournment. Madam Borana, how long will you keep asking for adjournments?” For a second, I went blank. I said, “My Lords, I have no instructions to argue.” The Bench replied, “We’ll give you the file, you argue.”

    That moment hit me hard. I gathered courage and said, “My Lords, it’s not that I don’t argue — I just never got the opportunity in your court. You may ask me any facts from the file, and I’ll answer.” That one push changed everything. Later, I realised the judges weren’t being harsh — they were motivating me. And interestingly, the same judge today appreciates my work the most.

    That incident boosted my confidence and reminded me that sometimes the courtroom itself becomes your best teacher. Every tough moment, every unexpected challenge — they all prepare you quietly for what’s next.

    What core principles have guided you throughout your career, and what advice would you offer to young lawyers aspiring to build an independent practice in the High Courts?

    This profession tests you in every possible way, emotionally, mentally, and even morally. What has always guided me through it all are three simple principles: honesty, preparation, and patience.

    Honesty — because in the end, the court can always sense your intent.
    Preparation — because confidence in the courtroom doesn’t come from personality alone; it comes from the hard work you put in behind the scenes.
    And patience — because growth in litigation doesn’t happen overnight. You have to show up every single day, learn, observe, and keep your calm even when things move slowly.

    My advice to young lawyers is simple — don’t wait for confidence; build it through preparation and persistence. Read your files as if they’re your responsibility, not just your assignment. Respect the court, stay consistent, and never let rejections shake your foundation.

    As for myself, I wish to continue strengthening my independent practice and focus on matters that hold both legal and human value. Law, for me, is not about fame or success — it’s about ensuring that justice is not just delivered but also felt.

    Get in touch with Priyanka Borana –

  • “I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept.” – Shreya Chaudhary, Associate Attorney at Maune Raichle Hartley French & Mudd, LLC.

    “I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept.” – Shreya Chaudhary, Associate Attorney at Maune Raichle Hartley French & Mudd, LLC.

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

    As a dual-qualified attorney in California and India, what first sparked your interest in the legal profession, and how did you chart your path in this field?

    I come from a family of lawyers, so this profession was all I knew growing up. I didn’t realize the impact of my dad’s work at the time but saw how his efforts positively affected his clients. I remember that on many occasions, they wouldn’t have enough money for his full fees but would bring him part of their seasonal harvest. Other than that, it came to me more naturally than most people—it never felt like work, and I was so excited to go to law school and later into litigation. Isn’t it a privilege to be in a position to make a difference in people’s lives and also get paid for it?

    For California, I never had plans to move, but I absolutely fell in love with the state and decided to get licensed in the one thing I knew—law!

    You recently passed the California Bar Exam on your first attempt. What preparation strategies proved most effective for you, and what advice would you offer to others aspiring to clear it? How has this qualification expanded your professional scope?

    As for preparation, I took an online bar prep course called Themis. Going to Berkeley Law for my LLM definitely helped, as it put me among the smartest people who have a reputation for passing this difficult exam on their first attempt. Also, it’s crucial to know one’s learning style. I really appreciate learning from my own handwriting, so I wrote everything down even though my bar prep tool didn’t ask me to. I also know that I panic toward the end, so I developed my own timeline, which was different from what the bar prep suggested. I took a study leave from work and had just one goal for those 12 weeks. I ate, slept, meditated, everything centered around my bar prep. Honestly, I loved the drive of taking on something so challenging and had fun with it. There’s no one-size-fits-all way to go about this, and I’m happy to answer specific questions for whoever wants to take this exam.

    As my interest is in litigation-related work, I wouldn’t say it expanded my scope; rather, it created any scope that exists, because one cannot take even a tiny step in litigation without a license to practice.

    Moving from legal practice in India to building a career in the United States must have involved navigating many differences. What were the key hurdles you faced in adapting to the U.S. legal system, and how did you overcome them?

    Oh, so many! I did not have anyone from my family or extended family who was a U.S. lawyer. From choosing law school to taking the bar, applying for internships, jobs, and visas—every step presented hurdles, or should I say, kept life interesting, as my friends like to put it. The biggest one for me is the visa, with, dare I say, the state of affairs right now. Also, finding a job in the U.S. is so different from India. In India, we don’t network enough, which I had to teach myself after moving here. I want to give credit to Berkeley, as they had a whole program to train international lawyers to get acquainted not just with the U.S. legal system but also with its unique job market. I didn’t expect it, but my Indian work experience was valued by U.S. employers as I think the two things, we have in common with them is that they value the “grind,” which they could supposedly see in my resume, and our common law system—and that’s probably why I was a preferred candidate for many jobs I applied to before joining the Office of the District Attorney, Alameda County.

    Work environments in both countries are completely different as well. There are different work ethics, professional relationships, sense of humor, and protocols. However, one funny realization is that lawyers everywhere are more or less the same kind of people so it was still a familiar territory. 

    You have served as an editorial board member for leading legal publications and also worked as a law clerk. How did these roles deepen your understanding of the U.S. legal system and prepare you for your current role?

    U.S. law school journals, and also Indian ones- stimulate a legal mind well. It’s so good to become aware of different ideas, methodologies, and international legal issues, and I think my favorite part of being in a journal was building community with like-minded people. I was in the Ecology Law Quarterly with other environmental law nerds and had some great academic and fun discussions in the process.

    My clerkship with the District Attorney’s Office was my first U.S. job, which makes it special to me. I feel fortunate to have worked for a highly reputed government office in the Consumer, Environment, and Special Litigations Department. It was a fast-paced environment, and there couldn’t have been a better way to learn U.S. law and see it in action than that. I worked on civil procedure assignments, evidence code, and criminal code—all at once. One of my first assignments at the DA’s Office involved prosecuting a corporation after a factory fire that significantly affected air quality for people in that vicinity, given California’s high ambient air quality standards. These assignments strengthened my understanding of environmental enforcement and also informed my approach to research, brief-writing, and attention to detail in my current role.

    During your LL.M. at UC Berkeley, you specialized in Energy Law and Clean Technology while contributing to journals like the Berkeley Technology Law Journal and Ecology Law Quarterly. How did these academic and editorial experiences influence your perspective on the intersection of law, technology, and environmental sustainability?

    A topic that’s very close to my heart is climate change. We treat it as “important” but not “urgent,” which troubles both my personal and legal mind. At Berkeley Law, I enrolled in courses such as Environment and Energy Law, subscribed to technology- and environment-related journals, and participated in clean energy student groups to engage with these issues and understand the work of scholars in the field. Being surrounded by like-minded people strengthened my commitment and deepened my understanding of how cleaner technologies are urgently needed on a global scale. The intersection of use of environmental resources and law is particularly interesting to contrast between the US, Europe and Indian laws. We have many vulnerable communities who get affected first by the impacts of degrading environment and climate crisis, and there is a lot of work that remains to be done to protect them. 

    In your current role, you work to support mesothelioma victims and their families. What drew you to this area of law, and how do you balance the legal complexities with the human and emotional dimensions of these cases?

    I honestly don’t know how to answer this question. From my practice in the Allahabad High court, Lucknow, to here in California, I have struggled with getting too attached to the outcome and client’s problems. I don’t know if that makes me a better or a worse lawyer. But I try to overcome that by something my senior told me early on during my India days that “you play a very small role in the grand scheme of things.” I owe my client to do my best work for their entrustment in me as their lawyer but I sure cannot change their destiny. Very recently, a client of mine passed away from mesothelioma (cancer) before the case went to trial which happens more often than not in this field. I witnessed his struggle through the deposition and eventually he just couldn’t make it to the end of the case. It breaks my heart but if I have done my role well, then it becomes easier to strike that balance. This also keeps me on my toes to put in the hard-work. 

    What advice would you give to students aiming for an international legal career, and how can they stay ahead of global legal developments?

    Just a few simple things. First, one needs to figure out if they want to study here, do an LLM or a JD, or directly take the California Bar (the only U.S. bar open to foreign attorneys without coursework). My advice would be to study here first, as it helps one get acquainted with the culture and decide whether it’s the right fit. Moreover, getting a job is nearly impossible without a strong network, which a renowned university greatly helps with. A warning—it is very expensive. I chose Berkeley over other good colleges that offered me scholarships because it was one of my dream schools, but one should always rank priorities according to their circumstances. Advance research on scholarships and on-campus jobs could help. I had an on-campus job that helped me a lot financially during school. It’s important to work smart—so if the plan is to immigrate to a new country, students should also consider Canada, Singapore, or the UK (the more welcoming ones in today’s environment). 

    One thing I would have done differently is to have a better long-term plan at least a year in advance of actually applying. I didn’t understand at the time that this decision would completely reshape my life as I know it. But I would love to help anyone who has doubts about the process or wants to learn from my experiences—feel free to reach out to me on LinkedIn.

    With the demands of your profession, how do you maintain balance in your personal pursuits, and what is your vision for the future of your practice?

    The litigation work culture in the US is similar to India as the work never stops from the inception of the case till the verdict. One can easily preoccupy themselves as there is always so much to do. However, in my experience, that sometimes leads to isolation, and when you are thousands of miles away from family, building a community becomes equally important. When I’m not working, I spend time with my friends, which is my number one priority as rejuvenated weekends significantly boost my motivation through the week. We often travel and hike in nature, as California is truly blessed with pleasant weather throughout the year. Of course, there are weekends that turn into working ones when the need arises like meeting a court deadline on Monday but I don’t mind that because I genuinely love what I do and take pride in showing up for my clients who are unfortunately struggling to live.

    I’ve always believed that being a lawyer is nothing less than a superpower- it gives us the tools to understand, question, and change things that most people simply have to accept. Right now, my focus is on mastering California law and becoming as confident in this system as I was in India. The process of adapting to a new legal culture has been challenging but also deeply rewarding—it’s pushed me to grow, think differently, and refine my craft. Whatever I’ve gained intellectually, I’d definitely want to leverage it to contribute to the Indian legal landscape in different ways, for eg.  I am working on a research paper on a social legal challenge that India faces; Grow as a multi-jurisdictional professional, and have fun along the way.

    Get in touch with Shreya Chaudhary –

  • “The TMT field moves too fast, and the opportunities are extraordinary for lawyers who master the hybrid skillset.” – Roopam Verma, Partner at IRIS Legal.

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

    Sir, you have built an impressive career spanning over 18 years across a top-tier law firm, a broadcasting company, a multinational IT consulting giant, and now as Corporate, TMT and Fintech Lead Partner at IRIS Legal. How has this diverse journey shaped your expertise, and what inspired your transition into private practice leadership?

    My journey at Khaitan & Co. gave me the essential foundation every lawyer needs, the ability to spot issues, conduct thorough research, and build watertight arguments. That big law firm environment teaches you precision and attention to detail.

    But the real transformation came in-house as Associate General Counsel at Capgemini and Senior Lead Counsel at Ten Sports. I discovered that being legally correct isn’t always the same as being commercially useful. You’re not just analyzing what the law says—you’re figuring out how to make business objectives happen within legal boundaries. I learned to ask different questions: How can we structure this deal so it actually gets done? What’s the smartest way to navigate regulatory requirements without stalling progress? It was a shift from binary yes-or-no answers to providing a menu of options with a solution-oriented mindset.

    After gaining this dual exposure, I returned to private practice with something unique to offer: not just legal expertise, but genuine understanding of how businesses actually operate. Now, as the Corporate, TMT, and Fintech Lead Partner at IRIS Legal, I bring that business-first perspective to everything I do. My clients get practical, informed advice that helps them achieve their goals. I’ll flag the risks that matter, but I won’t derail a good deal over theoretical concerns. At the end of the day, successful legal practice is about enabling business success, not preventing it.

    During your early years at Khaitan & Co, you worked on cross-border and domestic M&A, private equity, and joint ventures. Which experiences from that period continue to influence how you approach corporate and technology-driven transactions today?

    My Khaitan years were foundational in several ways. The cross-border work taught me to map regulatory complexity upfront rather than discover deal-breakers halfway through—crucial now in tech and fintech deals. Working with PE firms helped me understand commercial dynamics and evaluate legal structures through a risk-return lens. Joint ventures taught me stakeholder management across different corporate cultures—invaluable when working with multinational tech companies with different risk appetites and decision-making processes. Most importantly, that M&A training instilled rigorous due diligence and issue-spotting skills—the ability to quickly distinguish between genuine deal risks and ‘nice to have’ cleanups that can wait.

    You later transitioned into the media and entertainment space, handling high-stakes content acquisition and cross-border broadcasting deals. How did this experience broaden your legal skillset compared to traditional corporate and technology law?

    The transition to Ten Sports was a complete game-changer. I moved from the law firm hierarchy to reporting directly to the CEO, contributing in strategy discussions with brilliant minds from IIMs, IITs, and major financial institutions where business decisions happened in real time. We were doing creative cross-border structuring to establish global presence for a popular sport, coordinating with international firms across time zones on tight deadlines in a relentless, fast-paced environment.

    What made this particularly exciting was that broadcasting regulations in India were being completely redefined. Unlike traditional corporate work with periodic regulatory interaction, broadcasting required constant regulator engagement, anticipating policy changes, and building compliance into deal structures from day one. There were no established playbooks, so innovation was essential in structuring untested solutions.

    This experience fundamentally changed my approach—teaching me to think several moves ahead, build flexibility into structures for rapidly evolving frameworks, and integrate legal solutions with real-time business needs. Those skills have been invaluable in complex technology and fintech transactions where innovation often outpaces regulation.

    In your role at Capgemini, you managed various high stake legal portfolios, led complex software licensing and cloud transformation deals, and negotiations. What were some of the most challenging aspects of these negotiations, especially in the software and cloud service space, and how did you navigate them?

    As Associate General Counsel-North Americas at Capgemini, managing high-stake software licensing and cloud transformation deals required navigating multifaceted challenges under tight timelines while balancing cross-jurisdictional jurisprudence and business expectations across EMEA, APAC, and Americas—each with distinct data sovereignty and regulatory frameworks.

    Some of the critical negotiation points centered around licensee’s rights on original source code, ownership of developed IP, royalty and revenue split models, managing third-party and open-source components, establishing robust escrow mechanisms with clear release conditions, post-termination IP treatment including perpetual licenses and wind-down periods, the binding nature of revenue forecasts where clients wanted flexibility while we needed commitment, and structuring appropriate liability caps and indemnification with adequate representations and warranties.

    The key to timely deal closure was maintaining preparedness with legal alternate solutions to navigate negotiation impasses—whether through hybrid licensing models, phased implementations, or creative commercial structuring that addressed both parties’ underlying interests.

    With extensive experience in software, digital, IoT, and 5G technologies, what do you see as the most pressing legal challenges in the TMT sector today, particularly around cloud services, outsourcing, and cross-border data regulation?

    From my experience, the most pressing challenge is implementing the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 while preserving India’s competitive edge as a global technology hub. Organizations are navigating the delicate balance between data localization requirements, cross-border transfer mechanisms, and serving global clients across multiple jurisdictions. This becomes particularly complex in cloud and outsourcing contexts where Indian service providers must reconcile DPDP Act obligations with clients’ home country regulations—whether GDPR, CCPA, or sector-specific frameworks—often requiring sophisticated contractual architectures and sometimes separate processing environments.

    Secondly, there’s significant regulatory uncertainty around cloud services and emerging technologies. While DPDP Act rules are still being notified, sectoral regulators like RBI, SEBI, and IRDAI are issuing parallel guidelines, creating a complex compliance matrix. For cloud services, we’re seeing ambiguity around ‘significant data fiduciary’ classification, liability allocation between providers and customers, and critical information infrastructure obligations. In 5G and IoT, clarity remains limited on device security standards, edge computing liability, and supply chain security requirements.

    The key is building flexible compliance frameworks that adapt as regulations evolve, while ensuring legal rigor doesn’t stifle India’s innovation advantage. Success requires proactive regulatory engagement and translating regulatory complexity into pragmatic operational solutions.

    Having advised on M&A and strategic business transfers in technology and IP-driven sectors, what are the most critical considerations that companies and their legal counsel should keep in mind when structuring such deals?

    One of the most critical considerations is comprehensive IP due diligence that goes beyond ownership verification to understand value creation architecture. This means mapping registered IP, unregistered trade secrets, open-source dependencies with potential viral licensing obligations, third-party components, and ensuring proper assignment agreements exist for contractor and employee-developed IP. I’ve seen deals nearly collapse when acquirers discovered core technology relied on restrictively-licensed open-source libraries or that critical IP was personally owned by founders rather than the company.

    Equally important is analyzing transferability—whether customer agreements contain change-of-control provisions and ensuring data privacy compliance for cross-border transfers post-transaction under DPDP Act and GDPR. In IP-driven businesses, talent retention often matters more than IP, as innovation resides in people—structuring proper rebadging, enforceable earn-outs, retention bonuses, and non-competes while maintaining team morale is essential.

    The key lesson is that technology M&A requires legal counsel to think like business strategists and technologists, structuring appropriate representations and indemnities that fairly allocate IP-related risks.

    As a leader at IRIS Legal, you advise clients on both complex technology transactions and broader corporate advisory matters. Managing such a high-profile, demanding career alongside personal commitments can be challenging. How have you approached work-life balance, and what strategies have helped you manage both professional and personal priorities effectively?

    Work-life balance in demanding legal practice requires intentional strategies. At IRIS Legal, we’ve found several approaches effective.

    • First, creating clear time boundaries is critical. AI has made life significantly simpler by automating routine research and tasks, allowing us to work more strategically. When pressing deadlines or client emergencies arise, we put in the hours needed to deliver excellence. However, we encourage our team to leave early when there’s no immediate deadline—preventing burnout and maintaining long-term productivity.
    • Second, we’ve implemented a hybrid work model combining office collaboration for complex matters with focused, interruption-free time for deep work. Every day begins with a 15-minute priority discussion to align on what needs immediate attention versus what can wait—this simple practice brings remarkable clarity to otherwise chaotic days.
    • Finally, we leverage technology strategically — using AI extensively for research and routine tasks to free mental bandwidth for high-value, strategic work that truly requires our expertise. We also follow a 15-minute rule, prioritizing tasks that can be completed quickly to prevent small matters from accumulating into overwhelming backlogs.

    These strategies help us maintain high client service standards while preserving personal time and team well-being.

    Finally, what advice would you give to young lawyers aspiring to build careers in technology, especially those contemplating whether to start in a law firm or an in-house role?

    My advice is simple: in TMT, technology literacy is as critical as legal expertise. You need solid legal fundamentals, business acumen, and genuine tech fluency—not surface knowledge, but actual understanding of how tech such as AI models work, how cloud architectures function, how platforms handle data. I’ve seen talented lawyers struggle because they couldn’t grasp what their clients were building.

    I’d recommend starting at a specialized firm for 2-3 years to get breadth—exposure to how different companies handle tech governance, cross-border data flows, emerging tech compliance—then moving in-house to understand how legal advice translates into product reality.

    Staying current is non-negotiable. I follow AI researchers, read tech blogs as much as legal updates, and track policy developments constantly. When new regulations drop—which happens monthly—you need to understand both the regulatory requirements and technical implementation.

    The lawyers succeeding in TMT can walk into meetings with engineers and speak their language, then explain regulatory implications to the C-suite. The traditional ‘learn law first, industry knowledge later’ approach doesn’t work in TMT—the field moves too fast, and the opportunities are extraordinary for lawyers who master this hybrid skillset.

    Get in touch with Roopam Verma –

  • “What distinguishes an average lawyer from a great one is the latter’s ability to draft a legal document methodically and precisely.” – Priya Tandon, Senior Associate at AZB & Partners.

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

    Joining the field of law can stem from different motivations. What inspired you to pursue law, and how did your law school experiences shape your perspective and understanding of the profession?

    Like many other kids, my first exposure to law came with the movies. Law is an ever evolving combination of words, written in a manner that each and every word matters and has weight. For me, it was particularly intriguing to comprehend how mere words could wield such influence, to construct meaning from the given elements and to find solutions mostly in the shades of grey – there are no right or wrong answers. I am an alumnus of Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat. Jindal, a name reckoned with unparalleled academic excellence, was a truly innovative practical legal experience. It has a global outlook to curriculum – a carefully designed amalgamation of arts and law, offered through a combination of mandatory courses and multidisciplinary electives. Further, it has educators and students with diverse global experiences, the former having the flexibility leading to learning through thinking, questioning and engaging in meaningful discussions. Jindal fostered my understanding of law beyond silos, by equipping me with practical training and exposure in an overall dynamic space. From self-doubt, it helped me transform into someone who is not afraid to trust her instincts in driving solutions to complex legal problems.

    You started your career at a leading MNC in compliance and taxation. What were the most valuable experiences from that period, and how did they lay the foundation for your later work in providing end-to-end legal solutions on tax issues for major industry players across sectors like E-commerce, Liquor, Food and Beverage, Gaming etc?

    I accepted a Pre-Placement Offer from PricewaterhouseCoopers when I was still in my fourth year of law school. Therefore, immediately after my graduation, I joined their Governance, Risk and Compliance team. My job description required me to determine whether the internal controls and policies of Multinational Corporations were legally compliant, from a global standpoint. Despite a brief stint of only six months at PricewaterhouseCoopers, I believe that I learnt an extremely valuable lesson, which led me to secure and stand out at my subsequent job at AZB & Partners. I realised that a major hurdle in the practice of the legal profession is the flood of lawyers in the system each year – there is an apparent glut. The mantra to stand out, from what I learnt very quickly, is marshalling facts and figuring out the intricacies of how businesses function – both the granular details as well as the broad perspectives.

    What motivated your shift from corporate compliance to a law firm, and what differences did you notice in the work environments? How did you adapt to managing complex litigation strategies and representing clients before Commissioners of Income Tax, ITATs, High Courts, and the Supreme Court across India?

    My appointment at PricewaterhouseCoopers happened more by accident than by design, at the least expected time. Even though my job profile acquainted me with diverse areas of law at an international level, yet, I craved hands-on practical involvement in the application of law in intense adversarial set ups. This was the motivation with which I started applying to law firms, knowing fully well that the work there was expected to be more intense. As far as the work environments of both the places at which I have worked thus far goes, honestly, contrary to the popular opinion, I personally do not think that the same have been very different – fortunately for me, both the places have been marked with supportive supervisors, learning, flexibility, autonomy, open communication and work-life balance (for most part). In order to discharge the responsibilities that came with my new role with sincerity, I dove deep into the facts of briefs assigned to me and simultaneously, immersed myself in absorbing what I could about the nuances of the Indian tax regime/ Tax Treaties. Of course the “real-world” with no margin of error was daunting, more so, since I took up a highly specialized area, but nonetheless, being someone who had fought stubbornly for a spot at the most reputed law firm in India, I was determined to make the most out of the opportunity advanced to me.

    With over seven years specializing in Income Tax, International Tax, Transfer Pricing, Foreign Exchange, and Benami law, what has been one of the most challenging cases you’ve handled and how did you navigate it?

    For me, the fact that a case is significantly weak on facts or on a point of law will not by itself make it “the most challenging”. When it comes to taking a case to Court, there is always more than what meets the eye. It’s not just about reviewing documentation, drafting and arguing – it’s actually about all the behind the curtain strategizing and client management – balancing possible outcomes with client expectation every time the case is likely to come up. For me, the most challenging cases are the ones with an ostensible mismatch in the attainment of the said balance. In fact, even an unassuming case of assured balance may become a challenging one owing to certain unforeseeable circumstances, such as, delayed hearing on account of the opposite counsel or the Judge being on a leave, or on account of the case not being listed or taken up. There is no rigid or inflexible formula for ready application, so as to navigate a challenging case. Needless to state that when such a situation arises, which it will more often than you’d like, you will be constrained to think of creative solutions, trust your instincts and quickly follow through, irrespective of how outside your comfort zone it may be. It may not be in the fitness of things to allude to a specific instance of any case.

    You have authored several articles on contemporary tax issues, including Equalisation Levy, GAAR, Benami Property, etc. How has writing shaped your career, influenced your approach to complex legal issues, and contributed to policy discussions?

    I firmly believe that what distinguishes an average lawyer from a great one is the latter’s ability to draft a legal document methodically and precisely, in a manner that captivates the reader of such a document. The reader should not have any doubt about the observations advanced and its co-relation with the ultimate conclusion or the proposition sought to be canvassed. This is particularly true for those pursuing litigation, since very often, Judges base their decisions having regard to the content of the petitions, appeals, applications, submissions, etc. I believe that each time I write an article, it helps me enhance this precise skill. Of course, it’s a process – you come across a relevant contemporary issue or a topic you don’t quite know much about; you understand its context; you go over the related statutory provisions, precedents and scholarly works; you formulate your independent thoughts; and finally, you pen it all down! Each time I have done this, I have been exposed to the enormous gap between what the businesses are doing and the law as it is. This invariably opens policy discussions. Article writing assumes even more significance for entry-level associates, since a large part of their job profile entails churning out drafts. It goes without saying that it should be them who should be doing the reading, the thinking and the writing and not the nuanced Artificial Intelligence!

    While working with international entities and advising on transactional tax matters, how do you approach cross-border cases? What are the major challenges in handling matters like foreign exchange issues, M&A structuring, or international tax disputes, and how do you navigate them effectively?

    I believe that the underlying challenges and approach to each transaction or case is specific to its own set of facts and as such, the same cannot be generalised. Be that as it may, in my experience, the biggest challenge still seems to be the rather intricate regulatory compliances, both domestically and internationally. Since laws usually play a catch-up with the pace of dynamic businesses, the extent of applicability of existing laws on such businesses. always remains debatable and prone to future litigation. Further, with specific reference to the domain of tax laws, in cases where existing laws could not bring certain business models within the taxing net, retrospective amendments have been conceptualised and effectuated, consequently, adding to investor anxiety. I believe that one way to navigate this is to keep updated about the mechanics of disruptive business models and the manner in which such models are being looked at, globally. With the requisite background, the need of the hour is to engage with the policy makers so as to strike the requisite balance.

    As a woman litigator in a highly technical field, what challenges have you faced, and how do you balance mastering complex legal frameworks, devising litigation strategies, and mentoring the next generation of lawyers?

    Being a nuanced field, not many law graduates opt for tax law. What I noticed during my initial days of practice was that the litigation space, specifically, the tax litigation space, is dominated by a handful of lawyers. The percentage of women lawyers amongst this handful, is negligible. The trend seems to be improving as far as entry-level and mid-career level representation of women in litigation generally is concerned, where women seem to be matching, if not outnumbering men. However, effects of improvement are yet to be noticed in the tax litigation space. In my opinion, the strides made to ensure formalistic equality in many corporates and firms are laudable. This includes a supportive environment, with a clearly articulated policy on discrimination, harassment, flexible timings, maternity leave, etc. That said, in my experience, heightened scrutiny, specifically, outside these spaces, still continues to serve as a systematic barrier. It is up to the legal community to collectively work towards addressing this challenge. In my experience, one way to do this effectively, is to assume a mentorship role, offering insights, guidance and support to law students as well as organising and participating in periodical sensitisation trainings. Certainly, this would add meaning coming from women already assuming leadership roles.

    What advice would you give to law students or young lawyers considering a career in tax law and litigation, particularly in balancing technical expertise with advocacy and strategic client management?

    A couple of quick points here. First, as stated above, get your hands dirty figuring out the facts and how businesses function; understand risks. Second, whether you work for free or for a fee, marshal the facts and apply the law to create a positive impression. Third, which is an extension of the second, remember that preparation is key and hence, never appear before a Court unprepared, else, you will be doing a disservice to your client, the Court and the cause of justice. Fourth, know that networking is an integral part of the legal profession. You may have the best understanding of the law, but unless and until the client community reposes confidence in you, what is the worth of all the theoretical knowledge? Therefore, from day zero, network within the community – with your friends and associates across different fora in different parts of the country/ world. Keep in mind that most of the work is generated through references alone. So, be active on social media. Your network should know exactly what you’re up to. For this, post regular updates, write articles/ papers/ columns or participate in talk shows/ conferences/ seminars/ lectures. Fifth, have patience and perseverance – remember that giving up is not an option. Stay relentless and focus on building a quantum practice. Trust the process.

    Get in touch with Priya Tandon –

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Get in touch with Dr. Argha Kumar Jena –