With over nine years of experience, what initially inspired you to pursue a career in law? What drove your decision to choose this profession, and how did your journey shape you into a mentor and a leading voice in technology law?
It’s always nice to be asked this question. It gives you an opportunity to pause and reflect. And when I do that, I’m taken back to the time I seriously started thinking about law – probably around Class 8 or 9.
I knew I enjoyed public speaking. I loved talking to people, reading, analysing things, and connecting the dots. Law felt like a natural extension of these abilities.
That was also around the time when internet use was just picking up in India. I remember, sometime in Class 10 or 11, my father got us a desktop computer. I used it to look up what CLAT was, what law school meant, and what this profession was all about.
I also had a clear sense of what I wasn’t great at – I was average at maths. And I remember thinking: if I became an engineer, I’d probably be an average one. I didn’t want that. So I chose law. And looking back, I think that was absolutely the right call.
I didn’t overthink whether I’d succeed or not. At that point, I just knew I’d enjoy it. And that was enough.
Once college started, I found myself drawn to finance pretty early on. That’s what pulled me toward corporate law firms. I began with transactions—PE/VC, mergers and acquisitions. I spent four years doing that at JSA. But I gradually realised that advisory work really resonated with me.
As I moved from JSA to IndiGo, I became more and more certain that the intersection of finance and tech was where I wanted to be. And that brought me to Ikigai Law.
It’s been five years since. And honestly, most days, I’m genuinely excited to go to work. I think that’s rare and I’m grateful for it.
Basically, if you love what you do, you don’t really work, you just do it.
Well, you still work. It’s still hard. That said, there are definitely parts you enjoy. There’s intellectual satisfaction, a sense of recognition, and those moments of achievement that keep you going. Over time, you also start to see a bigger purpose. Whether it’s mentoring others, hopefully inspiring them in some small way or doing something else for the society based on what you have built. All of that becomes a motivator. You learn something new every day. And most days, you walk away feeling good.
We all have our own challenges to navigate, and when it comes to FinTech, especially disruptive tech like blockchain, it becomes even more complex. Since blockchain sits at the intersection of technology, finance, and law, we’d love to hear your views on how companies are planning for this shift and how you tailor your consulting approach. As someone deeply involved on the corporate side, how have you adapted to these evolving technologies? What challenges have you faced, and how are companies responding to them? For instance, how do you navigate legal ambiguities around cryptocurrency, which isn’t legal tender but is still taxable?
It’s a very interesting question. I do work a lot in the Web 3.0 space, along with traditional domains like lending, payments, and Wealth-Tech. The interesting part about being a blockchain lawyer is that it allows you to do the same thing but in a completely different plane. It’s like being transported to another universe where you’re doing the same things, paying, investing, lending, but in a blockchain-based world.
Right now, there are very limited laws in select jurisdictions that apply to such technologies. The exciting part of being a lawyer here is that you apply traditional laws, for instance, those regulating cross-border money flow, like RBI’s foreign exchange regulations or the PSS Act, to this entirely new world. The best part is that nobody has done this before. There are hardly any judicial precedents. So your thought process is as original as it gets.
As lawyers, we rarely get the chance to be that original. And naturally, a corollary to advising clients on emerging tech is that you get pulled into policy-making. So you get to do exciting work that I don’t think the previous generation of lawyers got to do.
But the hard part is, you have to really think originally. You have to know how the law applies in the traditional world. You need experience. Take, for instance, something like the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. You can pull out provisions from it and apply them to blockchain. Or the Collective Investment Scheme, something SEBI has been regulating since 1999. You might apply those same rules when advising a blockchain-based product emulating that scheme.
So yes, it’s exciting, it’s hard, but it’s the right time to be in this space.
You’re helping shape the future for generations of lawyers, and that’s a powerful responsibility. With your experience in suggestive work and public policy at Ikigai, could you share key learnings from that journey and how they’ve impacted your practice? Having transitioned from finance and law to technology, then an in-house role, and now back to private practice, how do you think these shifts will influence your career? How can young lawyers chart their own unique paths by learning from your journey?
In medical practice, unless you understand the human body, you can’t be a heart specialist. Similarly, in law, unless you understand the building blocks, you can’t specialize meaningfully.
So, for early practitioners, I’d say focus on the basics, reading the law, comprehension, analytical ability, and issue spotting. These only come when you’ve been exposed to a wide variety of laws, from IBC to RERA to the Motor Vehicles Act. The downside of specializing too early is that you miss that exposure.
The focus should be on building solid foundational skills, communicating well, writing clearly. Once that’s in place, you can specialize. Then you can apply those general skills to any sector, FinTech, SpaceTech, AgriTech. But if the basics aren’t strong, even in your chosen sector, things won’t work out.
So in sum, get the basics right. Then go with the flow.
The future in TMT space is definitely promising. I’m especially excited about AI, which is changing everything around us. And as lawyers, we play an important role. Who help sets the rules for this new world? We do.
We need more talented lawyers. We need thinkers. Not just people who can read the law, but people who can think about it. If you’re in law school or the early stages of your career, focus on that.
Wow! What a beautiful way of sharing your learning, it’s truly amazing. You’ve worked extensively as a principal associate advising FinTech startups within the Indian legal and regulatory framework. How do you see these startups overcoming jurisdictional obstacles, and what advice do you give them to navigate the Indian system? Do you notice significant differences between national and international regulatory approaches, and how do these impact startup success or failure globally?
That’s a good question. I think we, as a country, are doing well. Because see, UPI is a great success. The other parts of our digital public infrastructure, like account aggregator frameworks, which are ramping up, are all Government-owned and Government-promoted.
So the Government is doing its bit. Regulators are also, I think, trying really hard. For example, for the financial sector, RBI as a regulator not only looks after financial regulations but is also the monetary policymaker. So it has too much to do, but I think despite that, it has done a fair job.
Also, our industry is vocal enough to fight for its cause. We have the right kind of supporters for the industry, the right kind of advisors for the industry, and the regulator is listening. It’s not like the doors are closed. Regulators also understand the importance of having that dialogue with the industry because the time has passed when you can do law-making in silos.
So I think we are doing okay as a country. I’m not too concerned about the future. Now when I compare it to other jurisdictions, well, I would say that some practices are good in every jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions are more forward-looking in their approach. And India can borrow and learn from them.
Thank you so much for being absolutely clear about how the government has supported FinTech growth while also acknowledging its fallbacks. You’ve worked extensively in this space, but transitioning from traditional legal work to technology and law isn’t easy. You’ve mentioned COVID played a role, but what effort did that shift actually take? How did you successfully manage this transition and excel in a new domain?
Switching practice areas can be one of the hardest things to do. So I’ll take a step back and talk about why I made the switch.
I started my career, as I mentioned earlier, with a general corporate practice. I had the privilege of working with some of the most brilliant lawyers in the country at JSA, which was incredibly motivating.
While at JSA’s Gurgaon office, I got the opportunity to go on secondment with PepsiCo. At the time, PepsiCo was transferring all its major plants in India to Varun Beverages Limited – a massive business transfer. And being part of that was exhilarating. For the first time, I experienced what it means to run a business and impact of my advice on it. I was interacting with the communications team, the supply chain folks, plant managers – essentially everyone. My job was to orchestrate and help bring this entire transaction to a close. That experience made me seriously consider going in-house – it just seemed exciting and so much more connected to the business. That’s what led me to join IndiGo after four years at JSA.
IndiGo was just as exciting as I had imagined. I was working on aircraft leases, technology contracts, software that went into aircraft systems. That was my first hands-on experience of how law interacts with technology. And that really piqued my interest in tech. I felt like it was something I could understand and contribute to.
Then the pandemic hit. Around that time, I was already in touch with Ikigai, and stars just aligned.
So, some of the transition happened organically, some of it was by design and I think that’s how most careers unfold.
If I had to leave you with two takeaways from this journey, they’d be these:
First, don’t shy away from change and follow your instinct. Second, when an opportunity presents itself, grab it with both hands. Because chances are, it may not come again.
What a candid way of explaining things, where you had to put in that hard work, and you did. Congratulations to you for making that seemingly impossible transition from one aspect of law to another and making it big. On that particular note, we would request you to share some personal checklists or personal ways of dealing with these kinds of transitions because such broad area transitions are not easy, and many people are unable to do them.
What kind of suggestions do you have for these young lawyers who may start with one area but eventually want to transition? How do you do it, and how can one do it as smoothly as you have, without experiencing that stress of moving from one area to another while fearing the loss of something? Since you’ve done it, you’ll be the right person to suggest this to students and learners.
In addition to what I’ve already said, I’ve just one thing to add. In my experience, anyone going through a good law school, who has joined a good law firm or is working with sharp lawyers is smart and intelligent. That’s why they are where they are. So that is table stakes. What really makes a real difference is persistence, patience and resilience.
So, by the kind of understanding you’ve given us, resilience is absolutely important. Along with that, overcoming challenges is another key aspect. All of this you manage within the same 24 hours we all have. How do you maintain your mental, physical, professional, and personal health while juggling so much? What strategies do you follow, basic or advanced, to keep your sanity intact? As lawyers, we don’t talk enough about the stress we go through, whether in-house, in practice, or elsewhere. So how do you deal with it?
That’s one question I get asked a lot. And honestly, there’s no simple answer. Like most young professionals, work-life balance wasn’t really a priority for me early in my career. There was no fixed schedule – you worked as per the demands of your clients. And I think that’s okay. You’re younger, your energy levels are different, and if you start chasing balance too early, you may find yourself struggling for relevance later. I read that somewhere, and it really stuck with me.
Though, as I’ve grown older, I’ve found different ways to balance my life. And let me just say – I completely disagree with the idea that stress is something you should just get used to or live with because ‘it’s inevitable’. It’s not. Stress management, like lawyering or contract drafting, is a skill. And like any other skill, it can be learned.
You have to self-train. You have to find the right mentors, speak to the right people, and actively work towards it. I’ve done a lot of that over the years.
You also need a strong support system – people who are emotionally present and available for you. My family has been incredible, and I owe them everything. But friends matter just as much – both within and outside the profession. That’s been a huge source of strength for me. And most importantly, my husband is my biggest cheerleader and support system. Having that makes all the difference. Without it, it’s hard.
Another big learning has been understanding the link between stress and physical health. Over the last four or five years, I’ve realised it’s not just a mindset issue – your physical health plays a huge role. And I know this might sound like standard social media advice, but it’s true: you need to move your body. You need to eat and sleep well. That’s what made a real difference for me. In fact, staying fit has now become one of my core interests.
The third piece is having interests outside of work. That’s so important. We actively encourage this at Ikigai.
And finally, reading good books has helped. There’s so much you can self-learn today. As a generation, we’re incredibly lucky to have access to so much information. If we’re intentional about how we use it, we can teach ourselves almost anything.
Thank you so much for your beautiful answers. Just to quickly respond to one of the aspects you mentioned, yes, we are our own leaders, and while we agree we should take command and understand things, it’s not always that easy. Sometimes organizations are supportive, sometimes they’re not. What we take away from this conversation is the importance of understanding what you’re doing, how you’re working, and who you’re working for. If you’re in the right environment, you’ll not only thrive professionally but also personally.
I just wanted to share a few closing thoughts. I completely agree that the environment you work in, especially early in your career, can make all the difference.
I also want to take a moment to talk about what we’re building at Ikigai. At the senior and mid-management level, we’re very intentional about creating a space that gives even our younger associates a lot of independence. There’s a strong emphasis on thinking independently, and we’re a flat and non-hierarchical setup. You can speak directly with the equity partners, the founding partner, with me, or with anyone else on the team.
In many ways, we function like a new-age startup. Just like many of the clients we advise. And that’s something I’m genuinely proud of.
One of the most meaningful aspects of our culture, and something I hope more organizations adopt, is our deep focus on training and mentorship. It’s actually what drew me to Ikigai as a new lawyer. And now that I get to mentor others, it’s incredibly fulfilling. Personally, one of the ways I measure my own success is by how well I support and guide the associates and senior associates I work with.
My hope is that this approach becomes the norm across the industry. I’m excited about what that future could look like.
Starting from your first role in 2008 at Khaitan & Co., you’ve built a legal career that bridges traditional law and cutting-edge technology. What mindset shaped this journey? My journey has been one of deliberate growth — from shadowing senior counsel during internships to advising boards on privacy and AI. At NLIU, I learned discipline and legal craftsmanship. Assisting senior counsel before the Supreme Court taught me the value of precision in advocacy.
Joining Khaitan & Co. in 2008 gave me exposure to private equity and M&A, where I realized law can enable growth, not just mitigate risk. These experiences shaped my approach to law as a living system — not merely a set of rules.
“Every deal, every court brief was a rehearsal for the lawyer I was becoming.”
You pursued an MSc in Law & Finance at the University of Oxford in 2015. How did this experience reshape your perspective on law, business, and technology? Oxford was transformational. The program pushed me to think like a policymaker and strategist, marrying systems thinking with economic foresight. The admissions process itself forces you to ask: Who are you, and what will you change?
At Oxford, I realized law is not just about resolving disputes — it’s about designing fairer futures. Today, whether drafting cross-border data policies or shaping ethical AI frameworks, I rely on those lessons — precision, foresight, and human-centered thinking.
“Oxford didn’t just open doors. It reshaped how I walk through them.”
After Oxford, you joined Baker & McKenzie, London, in 2016, working on complex cross-border deals. How did this prepare you for tech law challenges?
Baker & McKenzie exposed me to multi-jurisdictional transactions involving data, competition law, and tech-driven businesses. It refined my ability to integrate legal advice with commercial strategy — a skill that remains critical in regulatory leadership.
“Global deals teach you that law is not just local compliance — it’s about harmonizing rules with vision.”
With the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA) reshaping privacy frameworks, what should businesses focus on?
DPDPA 2023 introduces a consent-first, rights-driven approach. Businesses must embed privacy into their DNA. The Business Requirement Document on Consent Management becomes crucial — translating legal obligations into features like granular consent, revocation, and audit logs.
For SaaS companies, compliance means building privacy into product architecture from the start — not bolting it on later.
“Under DPDPA, privacy is no longer a checkbox. It’s a design principle.”
AI regulation is evolving fast. How should SaaS companies approach permitted AI usage?
Permitted AI usage means innovating responsibly — ensuring data processing aligns with consent, purpose limitations, and ethical safeguards. For SaaS, it requires documenting use cases, maintaining risk registers, and conducting ethical reviews before rollouts.
“Permitted AI usage is about proving that innovation respects rights, not just scaling technology.”
You transitioned from law firms to leading compliance and privacy in-house. How did this shape your leadership style?
Law firms were my training ground, but moving in-house allowed me to build rather than just fix. At CoinSwitch and later at Dun & Bradstreet, I became a translator between risk and vision — operationalizing DPDPA and IT Act obligations into workflows teams could implement.
Leading cross-border teams taught me that leadership isn’t about authority; it’s about making people feel safe, seen, and inspired.
“You can’t lead well if you’re afraid of being disliked. Courage creates clarity.”
Aligning compliance across India, Singapore, and European markets is challenging. What worked for you?
The key is balancing speed with regulation. At Dun & Bradstreet, we operationalize DPDPA alongside Singapore’s PDPA while maintaining agility. The secret lies in simplifying complex regulations into actionable steps and keeping regulatory reporting both consistent and efficient.
“Regulatory leadership is about keeping law human.”
You’ve faced curveballs in high-stakes environments. How have they shaped you?
I’ve seen strategies falter and negotiations stall — not because of effort, but because the environment changed faster than expected. Each curveball wasn’t a setback; it was a reset that made me sharper.
Examples:
In a cross-border M&A deal, cultural misalignment nearly derailed progress. Listening and adapting saved the deal.
During a privacy review, spotting gaps in vendor contracts early prevented regulatory risk.
When developing a consent framework, simplifying it through user-centric design improved adoption across teams.
“Curveballs teach you to anticipate change, stay agile, and turn challenges into frameworks that drive long-term success.”
What do recognitions like being featured in prominent legal rankings or industry awards mean to you in terms of your professional journey and leadership?
These awards reflect consistency and relevance. They’re not destinations; they’re mirrors reminding me to stay adaptive, curious, and innovative while empowering the teams I work with.
“Careers aren’t built in boardrooms. They’re built in quiet moments of reflection, persistence, and refusal to be ordinary.”
You lead Regulatory, Legal & Compliance across India and Southeast Asia. How can a lawyer carve their path to becoming a DPO while managing these broader responsibilities?
Being an effective DPO while leading regulatory, legal, and compliance functions means more than knowing laws — it’s about embedding privacy into the company’s growth strategy.
At Dun & Bradstreet, where analytics power decisions for enterprises worldwide, the DPO role is integral to building trust while enabling innovation.
What works:
Deepen expertise in privacy (DPDPA, sectoral laws, cybersecurity).
Embed privacy into processes, not just policies.
Work across teams — legal, product, engineering — to align compliance with agility.
Learn from real challenges, such as mitigating risks in cross-border data flows.
Keep learning and stay visible through certifications and thought leadership.
“A great DPO doesn’t just enforce compliance; they design trust that drives the business forward.”
What’s your advice for young lawyers entering privacy and tech law? Pick a niche — privacy, SaaS, fintech — and go deep. Master laws like DPDPA 2023, the IT Act, AI frameworks, and client-facing SEBI regulations. Pair this with an understanding of how technology works, and share your insights through writing and forums.
“Expertise is built when curiosity meets consistency.”
You’ve handled billion-dollar deals and privacy decisions impacting millions. How do you stay grounded?
Balance is intentional. Strong mentors and high-performing teams keep me centered. High-stakes work demands clarity that comes from preparation and purpose.
“Balance isn’t slowing down. It’s designing rhythms that let you accelerate without burning out.”
Final Words to the SuperLawyer Community
Law is evolving at the speed of technology. Even in an age of AI and SaaS, three things remain timeless: trust, clarity, and courage.
My journey — from NLIU Bhopal to Oxford (2015), Baker & McKenzie London (2016), and leading privacy across India & Southeast Asia, to being recognised in the Forbes India Top 100 Lawyers 2023 and Business World Legal 40 Under 40 — is proof that deliberate choices shaped by curiosity and resilience can redefine what’s possible.
“You don’t have to be fearless. You just have to move forward despite the fear — and build a brand that speaks for itself.”
Having spent over a decade in the legal industry, handling diverse areas such as contract management, litigation and arbitration, trademarks, and legal advisory, what drew you toward in-house roles instead of pursuing a traditional litigation career?
Over the years, I found myself more inclined toward roles where legal expertise is closely integrated with business strategy. While litigation offers its own challenges, I was drawn to in-house positions because they allow for ongoing engagement with the business, where legal input can shape decisions early and support long-term objectives. What appealed to me most was the breadth of exposure from contracts and disputes to intellectual property along with the ability to work cross-functionally. I’ve always enjoyed being a trusted advisor, not just resolving issues but helping prevent them through practical, forward-looking counsel. In-house legal work gave me the platform to apply the law in a commercially meaningful way, contribute to enterprise-wide goals, and build deeper relationships across the organization. That level of involvement and impact is what truly motivates me.
Could you share a bit about your law school journey? What inspired you to pursue a career in law, and how did your LL.M. in Corporate & Financial Law shape your legal perspective and contribute to your long-term growth?
My journey through law school was both intellectually stimulating and personally grounding—it confirmed that law was the right path for me. I was drawn to the clarity and structure that legal thinking brings, especially in navigating complex business scenarios. Early on, I realized I wanted to work at the intersection of law and commerce, where legal insight directly influences strategic decisions.
What led me to pursue an LL.M. in Corporate & Financial Law from O.P. Jindal Global University (OPJGU) was a desire to deepen my expertise in areas that shape how businesses operate—corporate governance, M&A, financial regulation and cross-border transactions. The program not only sharpened my technical knowledge but also gave me a broader, international outlook, which has been essential in working with diverse industries and stakeholders. This academic grounding has played a pivotal role in my in-house journey. It equipped me to approach legal challenges with a commercial mindset, engage confidently with leadership, and contribute to sustainable, compliant business growth. OPJGU was established as a philanthropic initiative of its Founding Chancellor, Mr. Naveen Jindal, and I am truly indebted to him for establishing a world class university in India which has shaped the future of thousands of students globally including helping me in becoming a successful in-house counsel and working for giants like JSPL, BPCL, ReNew and GMR.
You began your career with an in-house role, a path not many young professionals take right away. What early experiences or challenges helped build your legal foundation and shape your approach to corporate practice?
Starting my legal career in an in-house role gave me a unique head start as it allowed me to understand the commercial realities of legal work from day one. Rather than focusing solely on theory or litigation procedure, I was immediately immersed in how legal decisions impact daily business operations and long-term strategy. One of the earliest challenges I faced was learning to tailor legal advice in a way that was both accurate and actionable for non-legal stakeholders. It pushed me to think beyond just identifying issues. I had to propose workable solutions that aligned with the company’s goals and risk appetite. Those early responsibilities, whether it was reviewing contracts, supporting compliance efforts, or advising internal teams, taught me to be responsive, business-minded, and pragmatic. They laid the groundwork for the way I practice today with a clear focus on enabling the business while managing legal risk thoughtfully.
Over the years, you’ve held in-house roles across various organizations. How has each experience contributed to your legal and leadership development, and in what ways do these roles continue to influence your current position?
Every in-house role I’ve taken on has added a different layer to my legal and leadership journey. Working across varied sectors and organizations has helped me develop a broad perspective and a flexible approach to handling legal challenges. It’s taught me to quickly understand business priorities and align legal strategies accordingly. Along the way, I’ve learned to navigate cross-functional dynamics, manage stakeholder expectations, and lead initiatives that have both legal and commercial impact. These collective experiences continue to influence how I work today; whether it’s offering practical, business-oriented legal advice, leading teams, or mentoring junior colleagues. They’ve shaped me into a legal professional who’s not just reactive, but someone who adds value proactively across the business.
At GMR, you manage end-to-end contracts for the entire non-aero business across India. What are some of the recurring challenges you face during contract negotiations in this sector, and how do you typically address them?
Working in the non-aero space at GMR Airports, one of the recurring challenges during contract negotiations is managing the varied expectations of diverse stakeholders from retail and F&B partners to service providers while staying within a strict regulatory framework. Each agreement involves a careful balance between commercial viability, operational flexibility, and legal compliance. Negotiations often involve complex revenue-sharing models and long-term commitments, which require clarity around deliverables, risk allocation, and exit rights. It can also be challenging to tailor terms that satisfy business teams yet remain aligned with airport concession requirements and regulatory obligations. To navigate this, I intend to focus on building structured, practical agreements with well-defined roles and responsibilities. I work closely with the internal teams to ensure business goals are captured clearly, while also ensuring the contract holds up to legal and compliance standards.
What are the key legal complexities you encounter during due diligence in airport-sector transactions, especially when working with international investors or structuring joint ventures?
In my opinion, due diligence in the airport sector, particularly when dealing with global investors or joint ventures, is layered and complex due to the regulated nature of airport operations and the involvement of public authorities. The first area of scrutiny is usually the concession agreement where we assess whether rights can be transferred, what limitations exist, and whether any government approvals could delay or derail the transaction. Issues like land tenure, encumbrances, and use restrictions are also critical, especially since many airport projects are developed on leased government land or under public-private partnership models. These factors often carry legal and operational risks that must be identified early. When foreign investors are involved, we also have to navigate FDI regulations, security clearance requirements, and ensure the investment structure complies with both aviation sector guidelines and company law. In joint venture setups, we focus on clarity around governance, economic rights, dispute resolution, and exit options, which can get intricate in a sector with long concession cycles. To address all this, we ensure to carry out detailed legal risk mapping, engage with stakeholders to understand regulatory expectations, and build robust representations and warranties into the deal documents. This helps ensure transparency and long-term sustainability for all parties involved.
What advice would you offer to young legal professionals aiming to build a career in corporate law or enter in-house roles early on? Are there particular skills or experiences you believe they should focus on?
For those starting out in corporate law or looking to join an in-house team early in their careers, I’d recommend focusing on building a well-rounded foundation not just in legal knowledge, but also in understanding how businesses function. Getting comfortable with contracts, compliance, and risk assessment early on will give you a strong advantage. It’s equally important to develop clear and concise communication skills, because in-house lawyers often act as bridges between legal and non-legal teams. I’d also advise young professionals to prioritize adaptability and commercial thinking and the ability to align legal advice with business goals is key in any corporate role. Real-world exposure, even through internships or secondments, can be more valuable than purely academic achievements. Lastly, find mentors, ask questions, and stay engaged with both legal and business trends. The more proactive and curious you are, the faster you’ll grow into a trusted advisor.
What guiding principle has stayed with you throughout your career, and how does it shape your professional outlook today? What is your vision for the future, both personally and for the legal profession?
The principle that has guided me from the beginning is: “Blend legal precision with business pragmatism.” This approach has helped me stay grounded in legal integrity while ensuring my advice adds real value to the business. It’s about being a protector of the organization’s interests, but also a facilitator of its goals. Even today, I focus on being solution-oriented and commercially aligned, especially in high-stakes or cross-functional matters. I believe that legal professionals should be trusted not just for their knowledge, but for their ability to guide outcomes and build confidence. In the future, I see myself stepping further into leadership and mentorship roles, using my experience to support both the organization and younger legal talent. As for the profession, I envision a shift toward more agile, tech-savvy legal teams, i.e. the ones that integrate deeply with business strategy and act as co-creators of value, not just risk managers.
From working with one of the biggest firms in the country to co-founding Gurcaran Divya Law Offices, what inspired your transition from a leading full-service firm to launching your own corporate law practice?
To begin with, technically, I didn’t co-found the firm. What was originally founded in 1977 was J S Arora & Co, a local tax practice set up by my father in a small town in India. He remains the founding partner, and we continue to carry forward the history, values, and professional integrity that defined his practice. That legacy forms the foundation on which Gurcaran Divya Law Offices stands today.
When I took over the managing seat in 2022, we rebranded the firm and focused on taking it to the next level, both in terms of geographical reach and the range of practice areas. We transitioned it from a local tax-centric setup into a boutique Corporate, M&A and Capital Markets law firm advising clients across industries and borders. In 2023, I was joined by my current co-managing partner, Divya Badlani, and together we now lead the firm.
The real turning point for me came during a deal I worked on at a leading full-service firm. We were advising the investors, and on the other side was a passionate founder, building something of real value, but his lawyer lacked the expertise to fully understand or push back on the legal risks being placed on him. The deal closed, everyone moved on, and yet I couldn’t. There was something deeply unsettling about watching someone unknowingly give away more than they should have, simply because they didn’t have the right counsel in their corner.
That experience stayed with me. It made me realise that India doesn’t just need more corporate lawyers, it needs more accessible, business-focused, high-quality legal advisors who can meet founders and businesses where they are, not just those operating in tier 1 firms for large institutional clients. That’s the gap I set out to fill.
Having worked on numerous high-value cross-border M&A transactions, what have been some of the most challenging aspects of executing such deals within the Indian legal landscape?
Let’s be honest, navigating the Indian regulatory landscape can be incredibly challenging. It is highly complex, with layers of central, state, and local laws that are often unorganised, outdated, or not readily accessible online. Approvals can take significant time, and there are usually multiple authorities and stakeholders involved, each with their own processes and expectations.
What makes things even harder is the lack of clarity in several regulatory provisions. Many times, the law is ambiguous, and no formal clarification is issued by the regulators. In such situations, lawyers and dealmakers are left to take a considered view based on legal interpretation, precedent, and practical experience, often under tight timelines.
Another challenge is the unpredictability of how different regulators or authorities might react to the same issue. A structure that works in one transaction may be flagged in another, even in the same sector. This requires not just legal acumen but also strategic foresight, strong communication with stakeholders, and a solutions-oriented approach.
Yet, despite all of this, the satisfaction of successfully closing a complex cross border deal in India is unmatched. The legal landscape may be tough, but with the right planning, advice, and execution, it is navigable.
Having worked extensively in regulatory compliance, especially for clients in dynamic sectors like fintech and renewable energy, what major sector-specific challenges do you frequently encounter?
Both fintech and renewable energy are evolving faster than the regulatory frameworks meant to govern them. In fintech, the challenge lies in navigating a fragmented regulatory environment involving multiple authorities like the RBI, SEBI, and MeitY. The laws often lag behind innovation, forcing us to interpret legacy frameworks in new contexts.
In renewable energy, the friction typically stems from federal complexity. Central policies may be progressive, but state-level execution, land laws, and tariff regimes are inconsistent and often unpredictable.
Across both sectors, regulatory ambiguity is a constant.
As the legal counsel, we are frequently required to operate in grey zones and provide commercially grounded solutions where the law offers limited guidance. It is where legal advice moves beyond compliance to become strategic.
Given your expertise in capital markets and corporate governance, how do you foresee regulatory trends evolving for listed companies in India over the next few years?
We are likely to see a steady shift toward greater transparency, accountability, and shareholder empowerment. SEBI has been consistently tightening corporate governance norms, be it around related party transactions, independent directors, or disclosure standards. That trajectory will only intensify as Indian markets continue to integrate with global benchmarks. The recent Jane Street case is a clear example of SEBI’s growing willingness to act decisively against market abuse, even involving global institutional players.
Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) compliance is also set to become more structured and enforcement-driven, moving beyond voluntary reporting. At the same time, we can expect sharper scrutiny of promoter behaviour, board independence, and market conduct, especially in the wake of recent high-profile cases.
Overall, the direction is clear: listed companies will need to move from a minimum compliance mindset to a culture of proactive governance. Those that lead on this front will be better positioned to attract long term capital and market credibility.
As someone who has closely advised on FDI and SEBI regulations, what are some common misconceptions or pitfalls that foreign investors face when entering the Indian market?
One common misconception is that India’s liberalised FDI policy means a deal can be closed quickly. While entry routes may be automatic in many sectors, the reality is that regulatory, procedural, and sectoral nuances often require detailed structuring and proactive compliance.
Another pitfall is underestimating the role of state-specific laws and local business practices, which can significantly impact timelines, particularly in sectors like infrastructure, retail, and real estate.
Foreign investors also occasionally assume that SEBI’s disclosure and takeover regulations mirror those of mature markets, but in practice, there are several India-specific requirements, especially around pricing guidelines, minimum public shareholding, and indirect acquisitions, that require careful navigation.
Ultimately, success in India requires more than just legal compliance. It demands a strategic understanding of regulatory sensitivities, stakeholder expectations, and long-term alignment with Indian business realities. How has your legal education at Symbiosis Law School (Noida) shaped your professional journey, and what advice would you offer to law students aspiring to build a career in corporate practice?
Oh, absolutely yes. My time at Symbiosis Law School (Noida) played a foundational role in shaping my career. One of the best aspects of the institution was its strong emphasis on internships. We were not only encouraged but marked on the quality of internships we pursued. In the final two years, that push became even more intense. The structure of long weekend classes gave us the flexibility to intern during the weekdays, which made a huge difference. I genuinely owe the start of my career to the opportunities I got to intern during law school.
On the academic front, during our time, subjects like capital markets and transactional law were not deeply embedded in the core curriculum, although optional courses and guest lectures were available. From what I hear now, the curriculum has evolved meaningfully to include more practice-oriented subjects like M&A, securities law, and corporate structuring, which is a great development.
My advice to law students aspiring to build a career in corporate practice is to structure their internships thoughtfully. Start your internships with boutique or mid-sized firms to build a solid foundation, then move to Tier 2 and Tier 1 firms as your skills mature. About two good internships at each level are enough to learn the ropes. Do not chase Tier 1 firms too early in your law school journey. Reserve them for your final years, when you’re ready to demonstrate what you’ve learned and convert the opportunity into a job. Always focus on quality; what matters is not just where you interned, but what you actually learned and delivered.
What advice would you give to law students who are just starting out in their careers? What practices should they aim to inculcate early on, and what resources would you recommend to support their growth? The single most valuable investment a law student can make early on is in meaningful internships. Not just collecting them, but actually doing quality work, asking the right questions, and learning on the ground. What you take away from those experiences will shape your confidence, skills, and career direction far more than any textbook ever could.
That said, conceptual clarity is equally important. A solid grasp of core legal principles and staying updated on legal and commercial developments gives depth to your practical work.
One area that often gets overlooked is networking and personal branding. Your batchmates, seniors, and law school peers will become your professional ecosystem and, very often, your strongest sources of referrals and opportunities. Build those relationships with sincerity, they will serve you far beyond your law school years.
Given the demands of a high-intensity legal career, how do you maintain a healthy work-life balance? Are there any personal interests or activities that help you unwind and recharge?
My trick for balancing work and life? I married the firm’s future co-managing partner. 😀
Jokes aside, the legal profession is undeniably demanding, and striking a balance takes intention. For me, discipline is key. A structured schedule, clear boundaries, and conscious downtime help keep things in check, especially when there’s no ‘boss’ above you, but accountability still runs deep.
One habit I’ve tried to inculcate is not setting unrealistic timelines for clients. It helps manage expectations and protects mental bandwidth. Having a partner who understands both the personal and professional pressures makes all the difference, and I’ve been very fortunate to have Divya by my side, keeping both life and law running smoothly.
What motivated you to pursue the LL.M. in Comparative and International Dispute Resolution at Queen Mary University?
While I was very satisfied with my Cornell experience, my LLM at Cornell was a general program. After working for a few years in the field of international dispute resolution, I felt like I wanted to do a specialized LLM in the field. I had by then worked on construction and energy related arbitrations, and felt the need to have more specialized knowledge. At QMUL, I took courses like ‘International Arbitration and Energy’ and ‘International Construction Contracts and Dispute Resolution’, which were specialized courses designed to equip one to work on high-stake arbitrations.
Interestingly, I had also, at that point, never taken a full- fledged course on investor-state arbitration. I describe it as interesting, because by then I had already worked on four investor-state cases, written articles and my Cornell thesis on the subject. While working on two high profile investor- state arbitrations, I realised that at times I didn’t know some basics because most of my knowledge was self-taught. Hence, I felt the need to go back to school.
How did your experiences at QMUL and at Cornell Law School together shape your understanding of international arbitration and dispute resolution?
My LLM experiences not only taught me the law of two major jurisdictions but also taught me their distinct approaches to dispute resolution, legal drafting and style of argumentation. Together, these experiences gave me a comparative lens and also trained me to adapt my drafting, argumentation, and advocacy to different styles- an essential skill when working in cross-border disputes involving counsel and parties from diverse jurisdictions.
As a dual-qualified legal professional in India and England & Wales, how has this cross-jurisdictional qualification helped you?
I believe being dual-qualified in India and England & Wales has helped me be taken more seriously as an international lawyer. Passing the two SQE exams is no easy feat and really trains you on effective written and oral advocacy. This is something law firms across the world acknowledge. In my personal experience, my profile was assessed more seriously by international law firms after I became dual-qualified. Further, with a qualification from England & Wales, you become eligible to work on cases across common law jurisdictions, significantly broadening the scope of your work.
What were some pivotal experiences that helped lay the foundation for your arbitration career?
A pivotal experience that helped lay the foundation for my arbitration career was in my second year- I had participated in a moot called Frankfurt Investment Arbitration Moot Court Competition. I remember making my submissions during the quarter final rounds and thinking- I could do this for the rest of my life! From that moment onwards, I tried everything in my capacity to be in the field, which led me to different countries and a wide range of work. I believe each experience of mine, be it an internship or a summer course, added something to my journey and led me down a certain path. For example, it is because I had participated in the Frankfurt Investment Arbitration Moot that I was given investor-state work in my internships. It is because I did investor-state work in those internships that I was hired by law firms to work on investor-state cases. And it is because I worked on investor-state cases that I got hired to work on bilateral investment treaty negotiations. Each step helped lay the foundation for the next step.
You’ve handled arbitration matters under UNCITRAL and ICSID rules across sectors like energy, banking, and construction. How do you approach disputes involving sovereign states, and what are the key considerations in such cases specially in the energy sector?
I have mostly worked on disputes where I represented a State. When developing arguments or defences for a State, it is important to keep in mind that, unlike private entities, decisions by a State are policy-oriented. It is important that you not only understand the policy perspective to the dispute but to effectively convey it in your pleadings.
As for disputes in the energy sector, it is important to remember that energy sector disputes are usually complex and involve a lot of technical jargon. However, that is precisely what makes it interesting to work on these cases. In my opinion, a key consideration while working on such cases is to make an active attempt to understand, to the extent possible, the technical aspects involved. I believe that greatly helps with legal part of the case as well.
Having studied and worked in various legal systems including India, the U.K., U.S., France, Germany, South Korea, and Hong Kong what differences do you observe and which system do you find most effective in dispute resolution and ADR?
Studying and working in so many different jurisdictions has been an invaluable experience. I now have a better understanding of cultural and social nuances, which helps me be a better lawyer. There are several differences I have observed, particularly, I have found the approaches of common law jurisdictions and civil law jurisdictions distinct. While I wouldn’t say that one system is inherently superior to the other, I have observed notable efficiency in dispute management in jurisdictions such as South Korea, Hong Kong, and Germany. These are models from which our own system could draw valuable lessons.
You’ve worked across major arbitration hubs such as Hong Kong, Frankfurt, and Seoul. How did you identify and secure these opportunities, and what advice would you offer to students and young lawyers aspiring to pursue an international legal career?
There is no easy path to pursue an international legal career. It involves a lot of luck and a lot of trying. My advice to young lawyers and students is to be brave and slightly shameless and take risks in their initial years. It’s the best time to take risks. All the places I worked, I applied to these places mostly through unsolicited emails. I didn’t have the courage to approach people in networking events for internships, but I would recommend it. Don’t be afraid of facing a rejection or worried that you will appear desperate. As far as you don’t harass someone with persistent emails, it is totally fine to write to someone unsolicited. They may reply or they may not, but it is your job to try. Also, do not hold back from applying for a vacancy because you don’t meet all the criteria. Recruitment processes have a huge element of luck. I have seen people with many years of work experience struggle to land something and I have also seen people with no work experience get a job offer. You just never know. Hence, don’t ever reject yourself by not even trying.
With the evolving landscape of international arbitration, how do you see its future shaping up in India? What steps do you take to stay abreast of legal developments and global trends in this field?
The arbitration law in India is ever evolving, with each amendment to the law inculcating the real-time issues arbitration lawyers face. Over the past decade, legislative and judicial developments have demonstrated a clear intent to make India a more arbitration-friendly jurisdiction. We are also seeing more Indian lawyers returning to India after gaining experience with international law firms, and bringing with them global best practices in arbitration. This, coupled with the growing business links between India and foreign counter-parts, makes me very positive about the future of international arbitration in India.
I regularly follow newsletters and forums that track recent developments, emerging trends, and case law to keep myself abreast with legal developments. I also find following people working in the field on LinkedIn to be quite useful. Academicians and practitioners in the field regularly post either legal developments or their own writings on their LinkedIn feed. This is an easy way to keep yourself updated.
Given the demands of a high-intensity legal career, how do you maintain a healthy work-life balance? Are there any personal interests or activities that help you unwind and recharge?
I am very grateful for the fact that throughout my career I have gotten to do interesting and cutting-edge work. However, the drawback of a high intensity legal career and doing cutting-edge work is that maintaining a healthy work-life balance becomes incredibly hard. One way I try to maintain my work-life balance is trying as much as possible to take vacations and not working on the weekends. During a working day, I recharge by making sure I get adequate sleep every night. No matter how busy my schedule is, I try my level best to get enough sleep. I truly believe it is really important that all of us put in active effort into eating and sleeping well, no matter our workload. It’s an everyday battle where you win some days and lose some days, but it’s important to actively create that boundary.
From graduating top of your class at NALSAR to training with Allen & Overy in London and Prague, how did your early international exposure shape your approach to dispute resolution and arbitration in India?
It was transformational. The vacation scheme (akin to an internship) at Allen & Overy (now A&O Shearman) felt like an introduction to a whole new world back in the day. So naturally, I was very excited when I got selected as a Trainee Solicitor at A&O in 2012, straight out of NALSAR, Hyderabad. As a Trainee Solicitor, you had to work for six months each in different practice areas. I had a great time working with the best legal minds in banking law and corporate law. In particular, I learnt and enjoyed the most while working on international commercial arbitrations under the guidance of Angeline Welsh, (now Kings Counsel) at the London office and investment treaty arbitrations under the guidance of Matthew Hodgson at the Prague office.
Being exposed to such complex disputes, multinational clients and the best solicitors and barristers in the field of arbitration, at the very start of my career, was an amazing learning experience for me. I am grateful to this day for the training that I received at A&O, especially under someone as brilliant as Ms. Welsh. The excellence and professionalism with which we worked at A&O is something that has stayed with me till today. I approach all my matters with the same vigour, professionalism and discipline. It is because of this training that I am confident of advising my clients in India and across the globe independently on international commercial arbitrations. My international arbitration practice in India is built on the early exposure I had at A&O. In later years, with referrals by former colleagues and seniors from A&O, I have been fortunate to assist foreign law firms in some international commercial arbitrations, on matters arising under Indian law.
What inspired you to transition from a global law firm environment to establishing your own chamber practice in Delhi? What were some of the key challenges you faced during that shift?
The transition from A&O to my own chamber practice has been a rather interesting journey with challenges aplenty. I quit A&O due to a combination of personal and professional reasons. I had already qualified as a Solicitor of England & Wales in 2014 and there were various job opportunities offered to me by A&O at their other overseas offices. However, I knew that my heart was in litigation so I decided to take the plunge and come back to India with a vision to someday have my own Chamber.
The challenge with this decision was that I was entirely clueless of what the right way forward was, after coming back to India. I started off with Amritsar District Courts since I belong to Amritsar, Punjab, and later joined a lawyer’s office in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Soon thereafter, I felt compelled to try the final frontier of litigation for me – Delhi. I came to Delhi with no job in hand and applied relentlessly to all the top lawyers and disputes practices I knew. Most of them rejected my application. But I knew I had to make it work and there was no going back. I may have lost confidence by so many rejections, but I never lost hope. I knew I was meant to be in Delhi and I just needed to wait. Within a few days, I found an office that would form the foundation of my future practice. I started working with HMJ Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora in 2015 and I cannot express in words my gratitude to her as she made me the lawyer I am today. In litigation, if you find the right mentor and you have the hunger to succeed, nothing can stop you from growing. With encouragement and support from her and Mr. D. S. Narula, Sr. Adv., I set up my own Chamber in 2018.
I realised that while setting up your own Chamber practice is one challenge, the bigger challenge is maintaining your client base, and the biggest challenge is growing your practice, given the tough competition in Delhi. That is where impatience kicks in because growing your practice happens at a consistent but gradual speed. The remuneration commensurate with your effort, also comes in much later. In the age of instant gratification, that can seem very disheartening especially if one falls prey to comparisons with other colleagues who may be growing at a much faster pace. However, if there is one thing that I steer clear of, it is comparison to others. I have come to realise that everyone is fighting their own battles at their own pace and all one can do is be sincere and diligent in their own efforts without comparing their circumstances to others. No two people will have the same background, or education or opportunities or capability or intelligence or luck even. You can only control your life and your actions. I have seen my cause list / clients grow organically and there is no greater joy in seeing your growth on your own terms, with hard work, sincerity and integrity. This growth would of course not have happened without my team. While different associates have come and gone, I am extremely thankful to my clerk, Naved Khan, who has been with me since Day 1 and who singlehandedly manages all the back-end administrative tasks for the Chamber letting me focus entirely on my legal practice.
I must add here that the support I have got from the Judges and the bar at the Delhi High Court has been phenomenal. This Court has encouraged me and given me room to grow and that is all I could have ever asked for as a first generation lawyer. The Hon’ble Judges have appointed me as a Sole Arbitrator, Amicus Curiae, Local Commissioner / Court Auctioneer in several matters. If the Court where you are practising is entrusting you with matters, that is the biggest encouragement you need as a first generation lawyer with no legal pedigree.
Having said that, there still exist biases in litigation and arbitration, especially towards women. The legal community needs to acknowledge that and take steps to promote more women in this profession, especially as Senior Advocates, Arbitrators and Judges. The profession can also feel exclusionary and elitist at times, and we need to do more to promote diversity and inclusion in our profession.
I have been lucky in as much as I have had great mentors in this profession who have held my hand during my most difficult times, especially when I have doubted myself. Destiny also was kinder to me in Delhi as I met the love of my life, Arshiya, within a few days of moving to Delhi. So all in all, despite the hardships, everything worked out when it had to. All I needed was some patience and faith. I continue to need it, as I work on growing my practice.
You represent PSUs and government organizations on sensitive matters including constitutional issues. What are some challenges unique to working with public sector entities?
Representing PSUs is highly rewarding, but can also get frustrating at times. For instance, for me, I am a panel counsel for Delhi Development Authority (DDA). Since I was not raised in Delhi, this panel provided me with the unique opportunity to learn about land related issues that are peculiar to Delhi, since DDA is one of the largest land owning agencies in Delhi. With this panel, I have had the privilege and opportunity to appear and argue complex arbitration matters, and constitutional matters as well. The biggest challenge in working with public sector entities is getting clear instructions, which sometimes may not come timely. You have to then be ready to bear the wrath of the judges and also work extra hard to make the case yourself from the limited information you have. Notwithstanding these challenges, I would highly recommend working with a Government / PSU panel because of the sheer variety of cases that you get exposed to and the learning and confidence that comes with the said experience.
Through your involvement with the Quarterly Bar Review, Delhi High Court as well as a Research Editor with the Milon K Banerji Arbitration Centre, MKBAC, NALSAR you regularly write and research on issues of legal significance. How do you believe academic writing strengthens legal practice?
Writing brings clarity of thought and conversely, if you have clarity of thought, you will make a good writer. Academic writing in any particular field of law definitely strengthens your legal practice. For one, you will be seen as a sector expert and it will be easier for clients to reach out to you on issues you have regularly written about. Second, to write an academic article, the level of research you do, enhances your knowledge and builds your confidence in that field. Third, it helps build connections with your peers and lastly, it greatly improves your drafting skills. It is very difficult as a practising lawyer, especially given the long hours we work, to find time to write academic articles. But it is certainly something that I aspire to do more often and encourage all young lawyers to as well.
You’ve been a vocal advocate for LGBTQ+ rights and speak on panels addressing the community’s legal concerns. How do you see the legal profession’s role in pushing for more inclusive rights in India?
Being a member of this community, it is my duty to speak and educate people on LGBTQ+ issues and legal concerns in this country. If I cannot fight for my own rights, how will I ever do justice and fight for my clients’ rights! The legal profession, by its very nature, being the upholder of human rights, ought to be inclusive. The majority of legal professionals I interact with, are keen to see the community grow and are keen to take the fight for equality forward. The lawyers who were representing the petitioners in the Supriyo batch matters are continuing to do a phenomenal job in raising awareness on LGBTQ+ issues and working towards legal solutions for the benefit of the community. I am excited to have joined hands with them.
Among the many matters you’ve handled, could you share one particularly challenging case whether due to its legal complexity, or procedural hurdles and how you navigated it?
What I love about litigation is that every day and every case is a new challenge. In my practice, I have worked on some really complex property disputes as well as given legal opinions on a couple of complicated international commercial arbitrations. What I have learnt is that even the most complicated matters, sometimes have their answers in first principles. Therefore, I always start from first principles and then navigate the development of the law in that area. My most challenging case is still ongoing and I will write about it when we have a judgment, hopefully, in our favour.
Being a poet and an avid badminton player, how do these creative and athletic pursuits contribute to your personal and professional growth in a demanding field like law and how do you manage your personal life with the professional pursuits?
Law is demanding and sometimes too serious a profession. There was no work life balance in my initial years in litigation. However, that is because I chose to work long hours, as I was driven by the desire to learn and open my own Chamber practice. I did not find time to either write poetry or play badminton then. It is only after about 8 years of rigorous hard work and long hours that I have finally come to a place where I can balance my personal life with my professional pursuits. However, I do firmly believe one has to find time and ways to destress beyond work else the profession can burn you out early on. Playing a sport helps your mental health and also makes you more disciplined with your physical health. Being both, physically and mentally fit, makes you more efficient and energetic at work. Spending quality time with your family and friends is very important for your mental health. I am blessed to have a partner and two families who have supported me in my journey so far and will, no doubt, support me in the longer journey ahead. It is my priority now to balance work in a way that I get to spend time with my loved ones, including my dog. I also love travelling and litigation gives you ample opportunity to travel and take good breaks during Court vacations.
With your experience across jurisdictions and forums, what advice would you offer to young lawyers who wish to build a meaningful career in arbitration and civil litigation?
I certainly feel that young lawyers today (although I do not consider myself too old to be giving this advice!) need to work harder because there is way more competition today than there was 10 years ago. While there may be more technology to assist them, at its core, civil litigation and arbitration require conceptual clarity. You have to understand what you are doing, why you are doing it, read bare acts, and not mindlessly follow formats or read only one line in a judgment and be happy with it. There are no shortcuts in this profession. Also, it is very easy to get swayed these days by social media profiles of legal influencers or the glamour reported at the top tier in the profession, especially in international arbitrations. That is not the reality. Reality is in the daily grind, in turning up day after day without fail, in being prepared for a matter even if it is the last matter on the list, in never giving up, despite the odds being stacked against you. Rewards will follow, but you have to put in the hard work. You have to be committed to your own growth on your own terms while never losing sight of the fact that you hold great power and responsibility as a lawyer. So be passionate, be diligent, be smart and run your litigation marathon with sincerity, humility and integrity. Surround yourself with people who will be happy with your growth. Most importantly, always be your biggest cheerleader.
With over 15 years of experience in Corporate Law and Litigation Management, how have you observed the evolution of India’s corporate legal landscape, particularly with the emergence of tech-driven businesses?
Thank you for the question. Over the past 15 years, I’ve witnessed a remarkable transformation in India’s corporate legal landscape.
In the earlier years, the focus for most corporates was largely on traditional compliance — company law filings, ROC, SEBI regulations for listed entities, and occasional contract disputes. Litigation was also relatively straightforward, often revolving around shareholder disputes or debt recovery.
However, with the emergence of tech-driven businesses — be it startups, e-commerce platforms, fintech, or now even Web3 and blockchain ventures — the ecosystem has evolved dramatically. We’re seeing much more dynamic areas of law now shaping up, such as data privacy, cyber security, intellectual property monetization, intermediary liabilities, and cross-border tax structuring.
At the same time, the courts and regulatory bodies have also come a long way“. There’s been a sharper emphasis on codifying norms, like the introduction of the IBC, the data protection regime that’s taking shape, and robust SEBI frameworks for tech IPOs. The judiciary, too, has embraced digital filings, virtual hearings, and has shown more readiness to adapt to the business exigencies of tech companies.
From a litigation management standpoint, disputes have become more complex — involving intricate shareholder agreements, IP enforcement, regulatory investigations, or even white-collar compliance matters. We now often have to advise clients not just on ‘law’, but also on risk mitigation strategies involving technology platforms and data footprints.
In short, the evolution has been from a largely form-driven, compliance-heavy environment to a more nuanced, strategy-focused, tech-sensitive legal landscape. And as practitioners, we’ve had to upgrade continuously — whether it’s understanding how smart contracts work or guiding clients on digital evidence and cybersecurity incident responses.
What initially inspired you to pursue a career in law and how has your background as a Company Secretary strengthened your legal practice particularly in the areas of corporate governance and compliance?
Right from the initial stage of my career, I was drawn to how law shapes businesses and society. The idea of using legal knowledge to solve complex strategic problems and enable organizations to grow responsibly truly inspired me.
My background as a Company Secretary has been a huge advantage. It has given me a deep, practical grounding in corporate governance, statutory compliance, and regulatory frameworks. So when I handle litigation or advisory matters, I don’t just look at them as disputes or transactions, but also ensure they align with sound governance and compliance practices.
This dual perspective helps clients not only tackle immediate legal issues but also build stronger, compliant businesses in the long run.
What inspired your involvement in POSH awareness, and how do you approach training with sensitivity and impact? Additionally, what are the major challenges you have to deal with while spreading awareness relating to POSH?
I’ve always believed that a truly successful workplace is not just legally compliant, but also safe and respectful for everyone. That’s what inspired my involvement in POSH awareness. It’s an area where legal compliance directly shapes people’s everyday dignity and confidence at work.
When I conduct POSH training, I approach them with a lot of empathy and practical examples. It’s important to go beyond the text of the law and address real scenarios, bust myths, and encourage open dialogue so participants genuinely understand the spirit behind the Act.
One major challenge is overcoming the hesitation or awkwardness people often feel around this topic. Many fear it’s only about punishment or blame. So, I focus on normalizing conversations about respectful behavior, clarifying rights and responsibilities, and building trust — which ultimately help foster a healthier work culture.
In your experience in handling Cybercrime and Intellectual Property disputes, what are some of the most critical risks businesses face today, and how can they establish strong preventive frameworks?
From my experience with cybercrime and IP disputes, two of the biggest risks businesses face today are data breaches which can expose sensitive customer or trade data and infringement issues, especially with brands and digital content being copied or misused online.
Cyber risks have grown with increased digitization, remote work, and online data space dependency. Similarly, with global markets and e-commerce, protecting trademarks, software, and proprietary content is now far more complex.
To build a strong preventive framework, I always advise businesses to invest in robust data security policies, regular employee training on phishing and cyber security hygiene, and to have clear incident response plans. On the IP side, timely registrations, vigilant monitoring for infringements and well-drafted contracts covering ownership and licensing rights — are critical.
In short, prevention is far more cost-effective than crisis management, whether it’s through internal audits, tech safeguards, or proactive IP protection.
You’ve led several compliance audits and risk mitigation initiatives. What are some common legal oversights organizations tend to make that could lead to long-term liabilities?
A few common oversights I’ve seen repeatedly are:
Lack of proper executed contracts or poor drafting which does not cover some very critical areas which often leads to litigation at later stage
Not updating statutory registers, policies, or board resolutions in line with evolving laws which creates gaps visible during due diligence.
Overlooking related party transactions and not maintaining proper documentation, this can lead to serious regulatory scrutiny.
Failing to robustly implement POSH or data privacy norms, treating them as formality rather than embedding them into workplace practices — this often surfaces later as litigation or reputational damage.
Ultimately, many organizations focus heavily on firefighting current issues but don’t invest in building a strong compliance culture. That’s where long-term liabilities quietly accumulate. Through audits and risk reviews, my aim has been to identify these blind spots early, so they can plug gaps before they escalate into major exposures
Reflecting on your early career experiences across various companies, which lessons or moments significantly shaped your legal perspective and continue to influence your practice today?
In my early years working across different companies, one lesson that stayed with me is how critical it is to understand the business first, not just the law. I saw situations where technically perfect compliance still failed because it didn’t fit the commercial realities or missed the human aspect.
Another defining moment was handling my first complex board dispute. It taught me that beyond statutes and contracts, corporate law is often about managing relationships, trust, and strategic communication.
These experiences shaped my approach today: I try to be a solution-oriented advisor who aligns legal strategies with the client’s larger business goals, while always being mindful of governance and long-term risks
As someone committed to both legal reform and social justice, what are your long-term aspirations for your firm and your role in the legal profession?
My long-term vision is to build a practice that’s not just known for strong technical expertise, but also for driving meaningful impact whether that’s through shaping better compliance cultures in companies, supporting alternate dispute resolution to ease systemic burdens, or contributing to causes like workplace dignity through POSH awareness.
For me personally, it’s also about mentoring the next generation of professionals, fostering an environment where ethical, business-focused, and socially conscious lawyering becomes the norm.
Ultimately, I’d like our firm to be seen as a trusted partner that helps businesses grow responsibly while also championing legal reforms and social justice initiatives that make workplaces and markets fairer and more transparent
Having established a firm that offers litigation support across the country, what were the key challenges in building such an extensive associate network? How do you manage the demands of leadership while maintaining personal well-being?
Building a pan-India associate network came with its own challenges ensuring consistency in quality across different jurisdictions, aligning varied local practices with our firm’s standards, and cultivating trust so associates truly function as an extended part of our team.
It required a lot of groundwork: clear processes, regular communication, and investing time in relationships beyond transactions.
As for balancing leadership demands with personal well-being, I’ve learned to prioritize delegation and build capable teams who take ownership. I also set aside time for short breaks and personal pursuits which actually makes me more effective and present when I’m back at work.
Ultimately, I see leadership not just as driving results, but creating an environment where both the team and I can grow sustainably.
I’ll start with a very, very prominent question: how did you decide to become a lawyer, and then how did you decide to pursue an MBA as well? And that too, by scoring a staggering GMAT score of 740. Please enlighten our learners and us as well.
So, I’ll be very honest, I never even dreamt of doing an MBA when I was setting out to become a lawyer. But luckily for me, I was born in a family where my grandfather was a lawyer, and that too, he wasn’t a lawyer throughout his career. He became a lawyer after he retired from government services. He was a civil lawyer. You would imagine that a lawyer who would take care of disputes, of people who would take care of disputes for companies, would have a lot of people coming into the house.
So, very early on, from my childhood days, I would see people come to him for advice and assistance, even people who used to stay near our society. I would always see them come with a sense of hope and a sense of gratitude when they would leave, and that feeling, that there’s one person who could give people that hope, that guidance and that comfort that they need at a time which is probably very traumatic or very difficult for them, was something that I took very closely. So, I wanted to become a lawyer from a very early age.
Secondly, I also enjoyed reading a lot, so that went in my favor because I realized that a lawyer’s job is to constantly update his or her knowledge, constantly keep on reading, and I enjoyed reading. So I felt, okay, this is another avenue where I think I can enhance those aspects about me because I also love to read and I love to learn more.
So, I really wanted to become a lawyer since I was 10 years old, and I never really took up any law coaching as such. This is going to segue into my GMAT score. I actually studied for the engineering entrance exams. I got a decent rank in the AIEEE and got on the extended merit list in the IIT as well, but I never wanted to become an engineer. Engineering was always, for me, a backup option.
Once I got a good score in CLAT and then subsequently a score in AILET, which allowed me admission into National Law University, Delhi, I think it was a slam dunk for me because A, it was Delhi, and B, it was led by Professor Dr. Ranbir Singh, who had basically propped up NALSAR to become one of the best law schools in the country. I was genuinely excited about being part of one of the earlier batches of this institution, which thankfully today continues to be one of the best in the country.
So, for me, law was always a very clear path. I would say corporate law was not really that clear of a path. It was only during my time working with different law firms that I developed a fascination for corporate law, and when I joined my first firm, I realized that there is a lot of excitement I find in helping businesses navigate challenges.
I would say that is effectively the mantra that I followed. What do I want to be? I want to be someone who helps companies, businesses, entrepreneurs, and founders solve challenges and help them on the path to growth or to avoid risks from harming that business or harming that proposition. So that’s pretty much how my journey started.
For my MBA, honestly, that’s a whole other answer. I never imagined that I would do an MBA. I never imagined I would go to INSEAD for my MBA, but yeah, I’ll be happy to discuss that once you want me to discuss it.
We would love to discuss this immediately because, while you had initially prepared for engineering, you ultimately chose to pursue law. How did you adapt your mindset while preparing for the GMAT, given that it requires precision and a completely different approach compared to the way lawyers typically write? How did you unlearn certain habits, relearn new strategies, and successfully achieve this remarkable result?
So first, the rationale for why I wanted to do an MBA sort of permeated from me setting up my independent practice. Once I set up my practice, I started engaging more with young founders and entrepreneurs. And because my intention was to help founders and entrepreneurs grow, it required me to deep dive into business and operations with them. I had to understand how they run their businesses, so I had to develop an understanding of business models. I needed to understand how they generate revenue and how they spend that money. I needed to develop an understanding of both accounting and corporate finance, and then I needed to understand what their next step would be.
One example I can give is that I was advising a blockchain company back in 2021, and they wanted to develop a very unique synthetic trading portal on the blockchain. There was nothing similar like that existing either in India or anywhere else that we could find. We needed to create a structure that would comply with whichever laws were applicable in India because there was nothing that uniquely identified how this business would work.
Helping that founder create a regulatory-compliant business model made me realize that there is a lot more value that lawyers can bring to companies and to founders because of our unique understanding of how regulations work and how they are applied, and because of our understanding of how impact and value can be created, having seen other founders achieve that. We can effectively leverage all of that exposure and bring value to founders not just from a legal perspective but also from a business perspective.
All of these things combined started making me think about how I could add more value to these founders, to my clients. I realized that yes, I do have some form of knowledge or experience, but that was all secondhand because it was gained through interacting with C-Suite level executives or founders. There was nothing concrete I could rely on to advise these founders. That is when I started researching more about how MBA programs work, the value-add that someone like me could get, and how I could enhance and leverage the experiences I had in my past.
That effectively started the journey and the momentum toward giving the GMAT, identifying INSEAD as a potential opportunity, applying for INSEAD, and then getting through. So that’s how that trajectory went.
In terms of preparing specifically for GMAT, I can condense it very quickly. Yes, there is a lot of unlearning that needs to happen. You are absolutely right. There is a lot of effort required to understand how to solve problems. The idea is, as Indian students, many of us have a predictable set path in which we solve problems, whether quantitative or verbal. But the GMAT is one exam where the strategy is to find whatever way works to arrive at the correct answer.
This is key in a service industry that relies on a lot of data that must be analyzed, synthesized, and then communicated to a client in a manner the client understands. The GMAT is effectively what you learn in an MBA program, condensed, and ensures that you have that knowledge ready so that you are not lagging behind in an MBA.
So there was a lot of unlearning and a lot of relearning in terms of how to strategically and tactically approach specific questions, and a lot of practice was needed. I think what people forget is that it is not about how much you know for the GMAT but about how much you have practiced in that kind of environment because it is a very intense examination.
For example, when I was giving the exam, there were COVID regulations for the admission centers. We had to give the exam in a room with our masks on. We could not take our masks off at all, and we did not have access to anything, including water. It was very strenuous because you are stressed about the exam, there is a timer running, you have to manage your time, you have to ensure that you answer every question, and if you skip a question, you cannot go back.
So there are many permutations and combinations outside of just pure knowledge. It requires a lot of practice simulated in an exam environment. I think what worked for me was that I pushed myself to simulate that exam environment regularly. And of course, I had the benefit that, since it was my own practice, I could identify time slots every day for practice. But I think being disciplined and serious about what you need to do is the simplest way to achieve a good GMAT score.
Wow! With your independent practice, you also managed to crack this challenging exam. Considering that you pursued your MBA during the COVID-19 period, a time when many perspectives on management evolved, how did this new understanding of management help you build a stronger practice after completing the course compared to the understanding you had before it? You must have done some comparative analysis on this if you don’t mind sharing, what were your key takeaways?
That’s absolutely the perfect question because that is the one question I ask a lot of potential applicants who are in the legal field who want to do an MBA.
That’s the one point I ask them to ask yourself, why are you doing this? What do you hope to gain out of this? Because an MBA is very customized, I would say. It’s a very bespoke course. Because you’ll get a lot of information and a lot of that information is probably available at 100th of the cost. The question is, what do you want to derive out of that experience? So I can say personally for me, there were a few factors that were very critical, which I feel I can leverage today after having completed. The first and foremost, and this goes well for most international MBAs, is the network.
At INSEAD, I think there is a rule that a particular nationality cannot be represented by more than 11 or 12% of the cohort. So it is by rule that you will be interacting with people from a variety of different geographies, different backgrounds, different experiences, and you are forced to be in that situation.
When I say forced, it’s by nature of the groups that are set, the sections that are created. You are constantly interacting with people whom you probably may not have anything in connection with prima facie. Like in my group, you would not have another Indian and you would not have another lawyer. You would have people from completely different backgrounds, and I think that helps in two ways.
Number one, after you graduate, your alumni network is probably one of the strongest in the world. So you can basically look at the alumni directory and you’ll find the who’s who of any industry. So you know, if you are stuck somewhere or you need assistance somewhere, you have an alumni base to rely on and it’s one of the strongest components of INSEAD. Second, you also develop an understanding of how different perceptions can approach different problems. Because when you are given a problem as a group, as an analytical Indian lawyer, I might solve it in path A. Someone who works in the renewable energy industries who’s only worked on offshore drilling, they look at that in another path. Someone who’s worked in hardcore finance, hedge fund, or investment banking, they look at that same problem maybe in my direction, but a different path. Someone who’s an army vet, a Marine operator, they will look at it differently. So when you are interacting with so many different people trying to solve a very similar problem.
You start getting an understanding of how different people think and what their rationale is for them. And when I look back, that helps me also tackle challenges that my clients face in different ways in which I would’ve never thought, because unfortunately, a lot of lawyers are caught in this bubble of thinking in a very pedantic and a very straight cut method.
That usually doesn’t happen in an MBA because you are dealt with problems that span different industries and therefore you have to rely on different ways of thinking. So the mental models, the thought processes, the approach, I think that also helps you understand problems from different lenses. And the last, and another important takeaway for me was how do you value the output more than the process? Because ultimately as a service provider, whether you’re a consultant, whether you’re a banker, whether you’re a lawyer, ultimately your goal is to resolve challenges and solve issues for your clients and do it in a way that they can trust you with their work going on. There’s a very important saying that one of the professors said that you know that you’re a good service provider when your client calls you up for help that is outside your core service. For example, if a client calls you up and says, Hey, Aditya, can you tell me the name of a good pediatric surgeon in Delhi? That means they trust you for things even outside your core competence. And how do you develop that trust is what we learned. How do you build processes that help you create that engine that gives them what they want?
So that was my takeaway, and that’s what’s helping me optimize and make my practice more efficient. More driven towards solutions rather than process, which may become an obstacle for client service
The kind of trust your clients place in you is truly inspiring. It seems this trust stems not only from your legal expertise but also from your problem-solving approach, even beyond traditional legal boundaries. Is this the same trust that has enabled you to handle multi-million-dollar, high-stakes deals? Could you share a story of a particularly complex transaction or negotiation where your combined understanding of law and management helped you find a solution that others might have struggled with?
Sure. So I think the first one, in terms of a complex deal. I think the most complex deal that I did was one of the biggest deals that I did in my independent practice. It was an acquisition of a logistics company from a listed company.
So we were acting for the acquirers. And safe to say that I had gained the trust of my clients to the extent that they would trust me with almost 150 crore rupee deal. In the listed company space, and what I realized later was this was going to be an uphill challenge because unlike any other deal that I had done even in my law firm career, this one required me to have a strong understanding of not just basics of M&A and transactional law, but also accounting.
About how business operations in this industry were, because I had to sit with the client and understand the implications of what the negotiations were going to be, because ultimately those were to be reflected in the transaction document. So having that kind of interaction first with business, then with finance, then trying to understand how those interplay with the legal clauses.
Then, drafting those clauses and then negotiating with a company that has probably a battery of lawyers that are assisting them because they’re a listed company. So that was very, very challenging, and it was complex transactions, primarily because there were a lot of payment driven issues because it was effectively a carve out of the listed company.
They were carving out a business and we were acquiring that business. So how do you create that delineation from now this belongs to us and whatever remains is yours. How the accounting for that is going to be done. And even if there is an agreement on how it’s going to be done in practice, ultimately it’s my job to put it on paper.
So doing that, and this was before my MBA. So I did not even have that kind of a formal understanding of how finance and accounting work. I had a bare bones understanding back then, but it forced me to continuously interact with my client and understand what it is that they’re looking for.
And I think this is the biggest learning I can give to anyone who’s advising clients on M&A. Understand what your client wants out of this transaction. Because not every deal is the same. People have different expectations from that transaction. And your job as a counsel and an advisor is to understand what that requirement is and then put it on paper to either ensure it happens or to protect so that it doesn’t get taken away.
So that deal for me was very challenging because I did not have any assistant, I had another senior lawyer who was working with me. But I needed to understand tax, accounting, employment, labor, and transactional work all on my own. So that was challenging, but very rewarding because we ended up having a very successful team.
To your second point about interesting negotiations, very interestingly, after my MBA, one of the deals that I had negotiated was against my earlier firm where I negotiated with one of the lawyers who I mentored back in the firm, and having that kind of interaction with him, trying to recall and leverage all the business side elements of what I wanted to protect for my client and interacting with him on that point was a very good learning for me.
And it was a very, I would say, smooth process because. I was very proud of the fact that he also came at me with very logical arguments. And this is another very important point because if this is going out to other lawyers who are in this profession, one thing again that you have to realize is please, whatever arguments you’re making in a negotiation, number one, be very well prepared with what you have to say, why you are asking for what you’re asking.
And anticipate what the counterparty might say, putting yourself in their position. Because a lot of time, the only argument you’re giving is, this is market standard. This is what we want. Without giving a rationale, then you’re effectively moving yourself back from the negotiation table and you’re making it break down.
So another very important aspect that I learned, especially for negotiations, is that you really need to put in a lot of effort, a lot of work to support what you are saying, why you are saying and why it makes sense. Because at the end of the day, your job is to ensure that there is a solution that works for everyone.
You cannot drum things down on the other side unless of course you have leverage. But most times when parties are on an equal footing, you need to come with solid arguments, but also help the other side understand. Look, this works for me and it also works for you because A, B, C, and what you are suggesting doesn’t work because of D, E, F.
So when you give rationale, it is very difficult for the human brain to immediately say no. It makes them think. And once you’re making someone think that, that means you’re moving ahead. So that’s a negotiation strategy that I deployed amongst the other things that I learned. But one thing that I felt very happy about was I could see that what I had learned almost entirely was being replicated by someone who I basically helped and who’s now a very accomplished lawyer in his own right.
So I think it was a good negotiation, and that’s the reason why I remember it so well.
Wow! The way you approach challenges using both legal expertise and analytical skills developed through your MBA is fascinating. How has this combination helped you attract clients like startup founders seeking fundraising and structuring advice? Since law itself demands logical thinking, how did you transition from initially not being inclined toward corporate law to strategically building your expertise in this field? What steps did you take to train yourself to handle these challenges analytically and logically?
I read a lot. The simplest answer is I read a lot. I put myself in situations where I was forced to be the one doing the grunt work. One example I can recall from the first firm I worked at was that we had one of the best corporate law libraries I can think of. There were books on M&A and transactions that I don’t think many law firms in India would have had access to.
When I had access to that library and to some of the best corporate lawyers in the country, I was as inquisitive as a young lawyer could be. I would always read up on different transactions. I would read about how contracts are framed. I would read about best practices in the United States or the United Kingdom. I would read case laws during my off time. I would review transaction documents signed by the firm 10 or even 15 years ago.
So, once I became interested in the business of transaction law—or any subject for that matter—it was always about putting myself in a situation where I could learn whatever I wanted to know about it. I would find resources, read, and absorb as much as I could. And now, this has become 10 times easier because all research often requires is a simple prompt. I think research has become easier, but at the end of the day, it’s about reading the full article or the complete chapter of a book and understanding it deeply.
For me, developing this analytical skillset has always been through reading a lot and talking to a lot of lawyers. Whenever I was on a deal with someone who did things I didn’t understand, I would never hesitate to ask them, “Why did you say that? What was the point you were making in this argument? Why was this so important?” You’d be surprised at how many senior lawyers genuinely appreciate junior lawyers coming up and asking such questions.
I would urge a lot of lawyers, especially those in law firms, to never hesitate in approaching your senior associate or principal associate and asking, “Why is this happening?” This is also a very important point for potential leaders. Whether you are becoming a senior associate, a principal associate, or a partner, whenever you are delegating work, it is imperative that you explain why you are doing it and what you are expecting from the team. This not only enhances their comprehension of the problem but also ensures that they remain focused on the outcome.
For me, developing that thought process was both as a learner and as someone who mentored young lawyers and interns. Constantly engaging in that way made it second nature to me. Whenever a problem statement comes before me, I can immediately identify the key aspects—the fact pattern, the trigger points, and the interests that the client needs addressed.
One of the first things I do when I take on a mandate is to talk to the client and understand what a successful outcome looks like for them. This is something I find many lawyers overlook. Even before my MBA, I always focused on this, but after my MBA, I learned that a successful advisor not only understands what the client needs but also helps the client define what they truly want. Sometimes clients are not equipped to frame their needs clearly. It is your job to guide them—to be like Gandalf for them, mentoring and advising them in a way that helps them discover the most viable solution.
It’s all about constant interaction, continuous updating of knowledge, and being hungry to understand things. In every form of communication—whether on WhatsApp, email, or in conversations with juniors or seniors—you must have clarity in what you are saying and why you are saying it.
Over time, it all becomes second nature. At least, that’s what has happened to me.
Being an avid reader and someone who has never hesitated to question and learn from seniors, how has this curiosity shaped you into an approachable mentor? You’ve guided many aspiring legal professionals, how does it feel to see your mentees succeed, and what key advice or guiding principles do you usually share with them that our learners could benefit from?
I’m very passionate about this, so I’d love to talk more about this. One, how I started, again, my inquisitive nature always made me question everything. And it was not just in a law firm; it was even at home. Why is this the way? Why is that the way? And because I had a background in science, it was always that questioning of why something happens.
Unless you understand the why, you’re never going to understand the process itself. So you need to know why something happens. There has to be a reason behind it. And that prompted me to be very inquisitive. Based on that, I spoke to a lot of people. Sometimes I would be shooed away, but a lot of times I would be given a patient ear.
And also, in a way, because I was instrumental in helping form the internship strategy at one of my firms, it made me interact with a lot of interns. Throughout that journey, I realized that interns also come to a law firm with the expectation of learning. They are not just there as law students who are expected to do a lot of grunt work or research work; they also have an expectation from the law firm. I learned that while interning in some of the best law firms in the country, a couple of them in fact, and there I got a sense of understanding what work goes on in a law firm.
But there is also that learning that happens from some of the senior lawyers, which is absolutely incomparable because they know how things work in practice. What you are studying in law school is a lot of academic knowledge. So it was my role that because I got that, I had to give it forward, and I enjoyed doing that.
I enjoyed speaking with interns one-on-one throughout my time in all the law firms that I worked with, and even now. Now the question is, how do I do it? Again, it’s a very similar way to how I work with clients. My first question to a lot of them is, I need to understand why are you here? Why are we talking?
What is it that you hope to achieve out of this? There are people who come asking me for advice on how to manage toxicity in the workplace, which is unfortunately a very important topic but is very prevalent. A lot of people ask, I want to shift from a law firm to in-house. How do I do that?
The first question I ask is why? What’s problematic in that law firm? What is it that you have identified that you cannot work for? If someone asks me, okay, I’m a lawyer who’s doing disputes, I want to go do an MBA, my first question is why? Have you asked yourself why you want to do this? Is it the money? Do you want to do law, or do you want to do law with that understanding?
So the way I talk to students, mentors, and young lawyers is first I ask them what their motivations are. So it’s sort of like helping them drill down in their own mind what it is that they have to speak about when they come to me. And my role is mostly to help them realize what it is that they want and then give them my understanding with a very clear caveat.
I am not a counselor. I am not a career guide, and I’m not, let’s say, an MBA coach. I can only tell you what worked for me, and there is nothing to say that what worked for me will work for you. So please take what I say with a pinch of salt. But what I can tell you are the principles that I applied; they are very likely to probably be relevant in your field because the principles are very straightforward.
Have clarity of thought, understand the motivation behind any action, whether it’s speech or whether it’s written. Understand the implications or have an idea of what the implications of those actions would be, and then if you’re okay with the implications, go achieve that outcome in a strategic manner.
Understand what it is that you want to do and then lay out a plan of action. Don’t just go headfirst into a situation and say, I’ll take things as they come, because that’s inefficient. One thing I keep telling people is law requires you to be efficient because at any point in time, you’re juggling five things.
So if you’re not efficient, you are bound to drop the ball. And the best way to not drop it is to have some sort of structure, some sort of, I would say in a crude sense, an SOP. If a project comes, then I do A, B, C. If X happens, then Y is the outcome. While it takes time, the moment it gets crystallized, it becomes a very standard operating process for anyone.
It then just becomes like a program. Once something comes, you know the path that you have to follow. So your brain is then only focused on exactly the substance, not the administrative process around it. And that helps a lot of people realize their own value, their own way of working. Some people work visually, some people work through reading.
Some are more analytical than others, but then they find what it truly is that they want, and that’s when it’s more of a eureka moment for some of them. Obviously not everyone has that, but that’s my path. It’s not spoon-feeding. It is effectively helping them understand who they are, what it is that they want, and how they can do that.
I can help you create a path to it, but what you want to do, that’s up to you. And then it applies everywhere, whether it’s professional or personal, whether it’s within the law or outside the law.
Navigating such a demanding career, how do you maintain a balance between mental and physical health, especially when long hours and tight deadlines are involved? What strategies have worked for you to stay productive without burning out? Additionally, looking ahead, what are your plans for the next few years in terms of your career and practice, especially after transitioning from law to also pursuing an MBA?
I can speak for hours because that is such an important aspect that I’ve realized. Unfortunately, a bit later in my professional life, but better late than never in my view. So I cannot stress enough how important managing your mental health and physical health is, especially in a career like law.
I don’t think I need to go into the details of why it’s important. I think it is now an absolute truth that you need to maintain every aspect of your body, whether it’s the physical body or the mental body. You have to, if you want to lead a life that you are content with. There is no question about it.
And I think that’s pretty much a given. How to do that is a major point. One thing I felt in my own life, even without having maybe the knowledge that I do today, is I could take care of my physical health because I wanted to. Right from the day I started working, in fact, a year before I started working, I made sure that I made it a habit to do some form of physical workout every single week, maybe four to six times continuously. Once it became a habit for me for, let’s say, over a month or two months, if I remember correctly, then it became an indispensable part of my daily routine, and I think that’s what’s most crucial. Once you make something a part of your routine, then it becomes something that you don’t need to think about.
Yes, there is that initial inertia that prevents you from doing things that you know are important. That’s where actual growth is. If you push yourself through for a short period of time, once it becomes part of the routine, in fact, you feel the other way. There was this period of time when I was undergoing some physical issues where I couldn’t go to the gym, and I genuinely felt that I was missing out on something during the day because it feels that once I work out, once I come back to work, I feel motivated and invigorated. A physical workout of any kind, whether it’s running, walking, yoga, going to the gym, swimming, any form of physical exercise that elevates your heart rate and makes you sweat a little bit, is, I think, very crucial not just for your physical health, but it also has an impact on mental health.
And when it comes to mental health, there is this saying that everyone should meditate for 20 minutes a day, except when you are really busy and stressed. In that case, you have to meditate for 40 minutes a day. What people don’t realize is the value in that statement is so deep that unless you do it, you will not realize it.
Meditation doesn’t mean that you have to go to a particular place; if that works for you, great. But meditation is effectively calming your thoughts. It’s not about having no thoughts, but mindful meditation. The one that I follow is just having comfort in knowing that whatever you are thinking is okay, and you let it pass without judgment.
Simply put, giving yourself 15 to 20 minutes a day, anytime during the day, where there is calm, where you are not worried about the next message, the next meeting, or a call that’s supposed to happen. The impact that that period of calmness has on your day, and if you do it over a period of time in your life in general, really helps you also become a better lawyer.
I’ll give you an example. There are a lot of times in a lawyer’s life when, during negotiations, things can get very heated, and I have seen lawyers lose their cool in conversations. One thing I felt after I started meditating is that my reaction to a lot of unnecessary verbiage that’s thrown in a negotiation is much lower.
I don’t react impulsively anymore, and what that does is it not only shows that you are the bigger person when you are keeping your calm while the other person might be shouting, but it also shows your client that you are confident about the path that you’re following. Ultimately, if your client sees that confidence in you, then that means you’re doing something right as his or her advisor.
So it’s not just about feeling good about yourself. All of these things actually also help you become a better lawyer as well. It helps you deal with the stresses that the life of a lawyer will inevitably throw at you. It is a given that a lawyer’s life will have stress. There is no escaping that.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded, or they’re probably practicing law in a way I have never seen. But stress is effectively in the nature of the legal career, and the only way is, you don’t wish for stress to go away, you learn to deal with it, and you learn to manage it. One of the best ways to manage it for me turns out to be meditation.
With over a decade of experience behind you, what initially drew you to the field of media, entertainment, and technology law as your niche area of practice? Were there any specific instances or experiences in your early career that inspired this choice?
While I was pursuing my undergraduate studies in law, I found myself naturally drawn to intellectual property law. It was the subject that most piqued my interest and felt aligned with my strengths, which led me to pursue a master’s degree specializing in IP law. I would say that I chanced into the niche of media and entertainment, rather than setting out with a deliberate plan.
While at BananaIP Counsels, a boutique IP law firm based out of Bengaluru, where I started my career, an opportunity came up for a secondment with Yash Raj Films Pvt. Ltd., one of the most prominent film production houses in India. I happened to be available at the time and willing to make the move from Bengaluru to Mumbai. That secondment turned out to be the defining moment in my career – it exposed me to the world of media and entertainment law in a very hands-on way and sparked an enduring interest in the field.
Over time, that interest organically expanded into the technology space, mirroring the broader industry shift from traditional theatrical models to digital streaming and content distribution. It’s been a rewarding journey watching the intersection of IP, media, and tech evolve – and being able to grow along with it.
What motivated you to pursue law as a career in the first place? How was your experience pursuing your LL.M. in Intellectual Property Law at NLU Jodhpur, and in what ways has that specialization shaped or benefited your professional journey?
I’d have to be absolutely transparent here: I’d be lying if I said I always wanted to be a lawyer. Growing up, I explored several career paths, and even when the time came to make a serious decision, I didn’t have a clear plan. Like most parents, mine nudged me toward becoming an engineer or a doctor. But the problem was, I was genuinely terrible at math and chemistry. To this day, integration, differentiation, and organic chemistry remain terrifying concepts! That’s when the idea of law entered the picture – something that seemed respectable enough to satisfy my parents (especially since my father was once a lawyer), and doable enough for me to take a chance on.
That’s how I ended up in law, and while my entry wasn’t driven by some lifelong calling, I’ve loved every moment of it since. The learning process, the anxiety of the early years, the timidness in client calls, the thrill of my first contract closure – it’s been a rewarding journey in every sense.
Pursuing my LL.M. in Intellectual Property Law at NLU Jodhpur was a pivotal experience. I still vividly remember stepping onto campus and being immediately overwhelmed by the sheer intellectual energy around me. While I already had a budding interest in IP law, the environment at NLU Jodhpur – exceptional professors, a rigorous curriculum, and fiercely bright batchmates – amplified that interest manifold. Some of my most valuable lessons came not just from the faculty, but from my peers, who constantly challenged me to think sharper and work harder.
The academic foundation I received there has consistently supported me in my professional life, especially during complex negotiations. The theoretical grounding in IP law has helped me back my legal arguments with confidence and clarity. I truly credit NLU Jodhpur for deepening my interest in intellectual property and for equipping me with the tools that continue to shape my practice to this day.
You began your career with a prominent IP law firm. How did that experience help deepen your understanding of intellectual property law, and what aspects of that role proved to be particularly beneficial in building your foundation?
I began my career with BananaIP Counsels, a boutique IP law firm based in Bengaluru. For any young lawyer keen on intellectual property law, I’d say it’s one of the best places to start – and that’s coming from firsthand experience. The kind of exposure and practical learning I received there helped build a solid foundation that I continue to rely on to this day.
In the initial months, I was completely immersed in trademarks, copyrights, and designs, primarily focused on registration and prosecution work. BananaIP managed a massive portfolio for clients across diverse sectors, most of which were still at the prosecution stage. I was part of a two-member team handling the entire portfolio, which meant I was thrown into the deep end very early on. It was intense, but incredibly enriching. That level of responsibility so early in my career helped me develop a strong grip on the basics and a sense of confidence in client-facing work. One of the things I particularly enjoyed was engaging with clients, understanding their businesses, their concerns, and helping them make informed decisions.
The first contract I ever worked on was a software development agreement, and it was anything but simple. At the time, I felt like I was stretching every intellectual muscle I had, even though in hindsight, my contribution was probably quite limited! Still, I remember enjoying the process thoroughly – it was a taste of what was to come.
The secondment with Yash Raj Films, as I mentioned earlier, was a turning point. It marked my entry into the world of film production agreements, artist contracts, licensing and merchandising arrangements – areas I wouldn’t have accessed so early in my career if not for that opportunity. I firmly believe that I have had takeaways from each and every contract that I have worked on, and the negotiations around them.
While I may not have applied it consistently over the years, one lesson from my time at BananaIP that has stayed with me is the understanding that a contract doesn’t need to be 50 or 100 pages long to be effective. I learned this early on under the guidance of Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala, the Managing Partner. With the right language and clarity, even a concise document can robustly protect a client’s interests. It’s a principle I continue to keep in mind with every deal I work on.
After your time with the law firm, you transitioned into in-house legal roles. What prompted that shift, and what differences did you observe in terms of work culture, responsibilities, and expectations between law firm and corporate legal environments?
The engagement with Yash Raj Films (YRF) gave me an initial taste of the in-house life – though not entirely, since it was still a secondment. I was technically still a firm representative, embedded within a corporate setup. That said, I was dedicated exclusively to YRF and found myself enjoying what seemed like the relatively comfortable pace of an in-house role. Being in the media and entertainment space definitely had its allure as well, and I was keen to explore the other side.
But I soon realised how misleading that perception was!
When I eventually transitioned into a full-fledged in-house role, I quickly understood that the challenges are very real – just different from those in a law firm setting. Gone were the days where I could present multiple legal options to a client and leave the final decision to them. As in-house counsel, you’re not just an advisor – you’re a stakeholder. The responsibility to safeguard the organisation’s interests rests squarely on your shoulders, and that burden isn’t one to be taken lightly.
You have to own every piece of advice you give, make judgment calls with clarity, and ensure that risks are mitigated to the greatest extent possible. It’s a role that demands both precision and accountability.
While I do sometimes appreciate not having to worry about business development targets – something law firm lawyers are always chasing – I’ve also come to understand just how critical relationship building is within an in-house setup. Whether it’s negotiating a contract or resolving a dispute, trust and rapport with internal teams and external partners make all the difference in getting things done efficiently.
During your time at Sony Pictures Networks, you dealt with a wide range of legal responsibilities, from content acquisition and syndication to anti-piracy and artist engagement. What were some of the major legal or strategic challenges you encountered in that role?
My time at Sony Pictures Networks was incredibly enriching and dynamic. I was brought on board specifically to handle the legal work for Sony’s sports network of channels – a significant shift from my prior experience, which had been largely focused on films. That transition itself was a steep learning curve. Sports broadcasting brought with it a whole new set of commercial structures, rights frameworks, and timelines. But it also offered a fantastic opportunity to expand my understanding of the broader media ecosystem and quickly adapt to a fast-paced, high-stakes environment.
We had a very lean team at Sony, which came with its advantages. The exposure I received there was tremendous—not only in terms of the volume of work but also the variety. Fortunately, Sony as an organisation extended to me the flexibility to go beyond sports, and I had the opportunity to work on transactions related to entertainment content as well—both regional and international. This included production agreements, satellite service arrangements, IT services, and more. It gave me a well-rounded perspective of the business and the interconnectivity between various content verticals.
The breadth of work – from content acquisition and syndication to anti-piracy, platform distribution, marketing, and brand partnerships – meant that no two days were ever the same. I particularly enjoyed working on contracts related to Sony’s digital streaming platform, SonyLIV. It was exciting to be part of the team navigating the legal landscape for a platform that was growing rapidly and experimenting with new formats, content categories, and user engagement models. Drafting and negotiating deals for SonyLIV required a different lens, one that considered evolving consumption patterns, dynamic digital rights, and a constantly shifting regulatory backdrop.
One of the major legal and strategic challenges I encountered was in the area of content acquisition and syndication, particularly in navigating the complexities of rights management across multiple platforms and territories. With the growing dominance of digital platforms and shifting consumer behaviours, it became crucial to ensure that the licensing frameworks we were working with were future-ready, accounting for evolving monetisation models like OTT distribution, catch-up rights, and platform-specific windows. Negotiating these deals required a strong grasp of both legal nuance and business strategy, especially when dealing with high-value content.
Anti-piracy was another area that stood out as both challenging and rewarding. The legal framework was only part of the solution – what truly made a difference was working cross-functionally with technical teams, content security partners, and external counsel to develop a holistic strategy. We had to move fast, be proactive, and often act under significant time pressure to protect high-value broadcast properties from unauthorised distribution online.
Overall, my time at Sony helped sharpen my commercial acumen just as much as my legal skills. I was fortunate to work alongside brilliant business and creative minds, and I walked away with a deeper understanding of how to structure deals that are legally sound, commercially viable, and operationally practical.
As Vice President – Legal now, you manage complex global commercial contracts across industries like media, gaming, and cryptocurrency. How did you navigate legal challenges in emerging and often uncertain areas like cryptocurrency, where the regulatory framework is still developing?
As Vice President – Legal at ITW Consulting Pvt. Ltd., a leading sports marketing consultancy, I’ve had the opportunity to work across a wide spectrum of sectors, including cryptocurrency platforms and brokers. While our core domain is sports marketing, our client base is incredibly diverse, and increasingly includes players from emerging sectors like crypto who are keen on expanding their market footprint through promotional campaigns and activations.
One of the more nuanced legal challenges in this space has been navigating the advertising and marketing compliance landscape for crypto-related clients. The regulatory framework around cryptocurrency in India continues to evolve and remains somewhat fragmented, particularly in the context of promotion and advertising. This makes it critical for us to be proactive and cautious when facilitating campaigns for such clients, especially those involving high-visibility assets like athlete endorsements, jersey branding, and on-ground activations during major sporting events.
Advertising, particularly in the crypto space, is highly dynamic. Over the past couple of years, we’ve seen increased scrutiny from regulators and self-regulatory bodies like the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI). The ASCI guidelines, for instance, mandate that all crypto-related ads carry specific disclaimers, avoid misleading statements, and are framed in a way that ensures consumer awareness of the associated risks. These requirements apply not just to traditional media but also to digital formats, influencer-led promotions, and branded content.
In our role, we take it upon ourselves to closely monitor regulatory developments and ensure that the marketing campaigns we help structure are fully compliant. This involves vetting creatives, advising on appropriate language and disclaimers, coordinating with talent managers to ensure alignment with endorsement regulations, and flagging any potential reputational or legal exposure to both the client and the sporting entities involved.
What makes this particularly challenging is the pace at which the landscape changes. We’ve had instances where guidelines were updated mid-campaign cycle, requiring real-time legal intervention and rapid reworking of campaign material. It has reinforced the need for agility and close coordination between legal, creative, and client servicing teams.
Overall, the experience of working with crypto clients has sharpened our ability to operate within uncertain legal terrain while still enabling effective, compliant brand campaigns. It’s an ongoing balancing act – protecting the interests of all stakeholders while allowing innovation in the way brands engage with sports audiences.
Currently, your company operates across jurisdictions such as the UK, UAE, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. How do you handle cross-border legal compliances, especially when it comes to reconciling differing regulatory standards, managing jurisdictional risks, and ensuring contractual consistency?
At ITW, our operations span multiple jurisdictions including the UK, UAE, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, each with its own unique regulatory and commercial landscape. Managing legal compliance across these markets requires a combination of structured internal processes, a proactive risk management approach, and at times, collaboration with reliable local counsel.
Our approach typically begins with in-depth legal research to understand the local regulatory environment and identify key areas where local laws diverge from Indian law or from each other. This helps us tailor our contractual structures accordingly and flag jurisdiction-specific risks early in the deal cycle. Where matters are particularly nuanced, sensitive, or enforcement-heavy, we do supplement our internal research with guidance from trusted local counsels. However, we remain deeply involved in the interpretation and application of such advice to ensure it aligns with our business context and deal objectives.
One of the core challenges is reconciling differing regulatory standards, particularly around areas like advertising laws, data protection, taxation, anti-bribery, and foreign exchange regulations. The first step is always jurisdictional risk mapping: understanding where local laws diverge significantly from Indian legal standards or from each other, and identifying areas that may require bespoke contractual treatment.
We mitigate these risks by working closely with experienced local counsel in each jurisdiction, especially when it comes to structuring agreements, reviewing campaign compliance requirements, or interpreting local laws that impact talent contracts, IP rights, or payment flows. We also build jurisdiction-specific clauses into our contracts, ranging from governing law and dispute resolution mechanisms to regulatory compliance representations and exit rights, ensuring each agreement is not only enforceable but also commercially viable across markets.
Contractual consistency across jurisdictions is another key priority. While commercial terms may vary, we maintain a common legal backbone for our master service agreements, advertising agreements, and IP licensing documents. This standardisation ensures internal clarity and operational ease, while still allowing flexibility for local adaptation.
Additionally, we’ve institutionalised internal legal review protocols for cross-border deals, including multi-tier approval processes, and regular compliance check-ins with our business and finance teams.
Ultimately, operating across borders requires striking a balance between legal risk management and commercial pragmatism. Our goal is to be a business enabler, facilitating seamless execution while ensuring that every deal aligns with both global compliance standards and local legal realities.
Looking back, what has been one of the most challenging cases or experiences you’ve faced in your legal career, and how did you overcome it? Also, how do you stay updated with the ever-evolving landscape of IP and technology law?
I’ve always found answering the first question quite challenging. Unfortunately, I wouldn’t be able to give you a straight answer in this instance either. All I can say is that whenever I’ve faced challenges during the course of my career, they felt at the time like insurmountable mountains – situations I had no idea how I’d navigate. Some of those I managed to overcome; in many others, I failed miserably. But with the benefit of hindsight, I now view those moments through the lens of what they taught me. Often, I find myself wondering if they were really as daunting as they seemed back then. What has remained with me are the lessons – whether it was about managing expectations, communicating under pressure, or simply learning how not to handle a situation. Every experience has contributed to shaping how I approach my work today.
As for staying updated with the ever-evolving landscape of IP and technology law, I try to stay curious and consistent in my learning. I regularly track regulatory updates, case law developments, and global trends through a mix of legal journals, newsletters, and reliable blogs, both domestic and international. I also find that industry-specific reports and thought pieces published by consulting firms often provide valuable insight into how law intersects with business strategy in tech and media.
Most importantly, I learn a lot through practical exposure, by working on transactions that push the boundaries of existing frameworks and force me to explore new interpretations. In many ways, the clients and teams I work with keep me on my toes more than any publication can. Conversations, negotiations, and even internal debates often lead to the most meaningful learning moments.
What advice would you offer to young lawyers or law students aspiring to enter the dynamic fields of media and IP law? Are there any values, habits, or skills they should focus on developing early in their careers?
If I had to give one piece of advice to young lawyers or law students aspiring to enter the world of media and IP law, it would be this: stay curious and stay patient.
It’s a fascinating field – creative, fast-moving, and filled with opportunities, but it also takes time to find your footing. You might start out doing what seems like routine or administrative work, but those early experiences often lay the strongest foundations. Be open to learning from everything, even the smallest tasks.
Develop the habit of reading – contracts, case law, industry news. Understanding how the law interacts with business, creativity, and technology is key in this space. At the same time, work on your communication skills. You don’t just need to know the law – you need to be able to explain it clearly to people who may not.
Another thing I’d say is: don’t be afraid to ask questions. Some of the best learning I’ve had came from simply being curious enough to say, “I don’t understand, can you explain?” Over the years, I’ve also found that when younger colleagues or interns ask me questions, it often leads to discussions that help me reflect and learn as well. Sometimes, their questions challenge assumptions or bring in a fresh perspective I hadn’t considered. Those exchanges are some of the most rewarding parts of the job, and a reminder that learning is always a two-way street.
And finally, be kind, to yourself and others. Law can be intense, and it’s easy to get caught up in chasing the next big thing. But if you focus on doing good work, being dependable, and staying grounded, the rest has a way of falling into place.
There’s no one path to success in this field, and that’s the beauty of it. So take your time, build your skills, and don’t forget to enjoy the ride.
Lastly, given the demanding nature of your work, how do you strike a balance between your professional and personal life? What does unwinding or relaxing look like for you?
To be honest, that’s something I’m still figuring out. Striking a balance between work and personal life doesn’t come naturally to me – disconnecting from work can be difficult, especially when you’re fully invested in what you do. Thankfully, I have a very strict (albeit quite understanding) wife and the cutest one-year-old who keep me in check and remind me when it’s time to log off.
Unwinding, for me, is all about the simple joys – spending time with my family, catching up with friends, planning a quick trip, or just having a quiet evening at home. I enjoy reading, and I try to stay active through football, badminton, and more recently, pickleball (was just curious to know what the fuss was all about, but I’ve grown to really like it).
Balance is still a work in progress, but I’m grateful for the people and little routines in my life that help me step away from the legal grind and recharge.
Your journey from Dhanbad to where you stand today is truly inspiring. How have your personal experiences and academic background in Political Science shaped your decision to pursue law, and how have they influenced your strong legal journey and commitment to the profession?
I’m a first-generation lawyer, born into a family deeply rooted in the pharmaceutical business, a world far removed from the courts and statutes that now define my everyday life. Growing up with cerebral palsy in a small town like Dhanbad, I often felt the need to prove myself – to be seen, to be heard, and to be taken seriously. For me, the black coat was more than a symbol of the legal profession, it signified a possibility – that merit could speak louder than mobility and that confidence and conviction could override any preconceived notions about ability.
I came to Delhi and pursued Political Science. The discipline deepened my understanding of the Constitution, legal systems, and power structures. It eventually led me to Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law where I discovered my calling in Intellectual Property law.
My personal experience instilled in me a deep sense of resilience, to persist, adapt, and advocate in a world not always built for difference. At the same time, my academic grounding in Political Science gave me a strong structural lens helping me understand laws and their intricate interplay with legal systems and institutions.
This foundation, combined with lived experience, has shaped not just how I view the law but how I approach Intellectual Property, with empathy for creators and right holders, strategic thinking for brand protection, and a deep sense of purpose in safeguarding invention.
In the early phase of your career, you worked in a full-service law firm and an independent general practitioner. What motivated your transition into intellectual property law, and how did those foundational years shape your current approach to IP practice?
In the early phase of my career, working with a full-service law firm and an independent general practitioner exposed me to the breadth and intensity of legal practice – from civil suits to commercial disputes. It was a rigorous training ground that honed my advocacy, research, and drafting skills.
I began noticing how deeply brands, trademarks, domain names, content, and technology were getting intertwined with legal disputes. I was drawn to the unique intersection of law, commerce, and creativity that intellectual property law offered. The shift to IP felt organic—it allowed me to work not just reactively in disputes, but also proactively with creators, individuals and businesses to safeguard what they were building.
Those foundational litigation years instilled in me a detail-oriented, strategic mindset. They taught me how to anticipate risks, think like a litigator even in advisory work, and approach IP not in isolation, but in its commercial and legal context.
You’ve represented clients in domain name disputes before WIPO and INDRP. Could you walk us through your experience in this space? What are some of the key legal and strategic challenges entities commonly face in such matters?
The legal framework under both WIPO’s UDRP and India’s INDRP is robust but exacting, placing the onus on the Complainant to establish three core elements: (1) that the domain is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which it has rights, (2) that the registrant lacks legitimate interests in the domain, and (3) that the domain has been registered and is being used in bad faith. While WIPO offers quicker, globally recognized redress—typically resolving disputes within 60–75 days—INDRP is key for .in domain disputes and may take 3–6 months or more due to procedural flexibilities and single-arbitrator handling under NIXI.
Success before both forums relies heavily on the Complainant’s ability to present comprehensive evidence, including proof of trademark rights, prior and continuous use, and supporting documentation like screenshots of misuse, WHOIS records, archived web content, and prior communications. This evidence must clearly align with the legal criteria, particularly to demonstrate the registrant’s bad faith and lack of legitimate interest. The process is evidence-driven and leaves little room for error.
One of the significant challenges is that infringers often hide behind privacy services or proxy registrations, making it harder to trace the true registrant. WIPO has mechanisms in place to request unmasking, usually coordinated with the registrar, though it’s not guaranteed. INDRP poses more hurdles due to NIXI’s limited procedural transparency and lack of early disclosure protocols. In such cases, complainants must rely on circumstantial and digital forensics—such as WHOIS history, DNS and IP data, website metadata, and linkages across abusive registrations—to build a strong, inferential case.
While dealing with software piracy and advising software firms, what major trends and challenges have you observed globally? How do you think India’s legal and enforcement mechanisms compare with international frameworks in addressing piracy?
Software piracy today has evolved into a highly complex and dynamic threat, fuelled by digital proliferation and the increasing sophistication of infringers. We’ve seen a decisive shift from physical duplication to digital piracy, with unauthorized downloads, license key sharing, and hacked installations spreading through torrent sites, web platforms, and even on social media and e-commerce portals. A major trend is the rise of ‘cracked’ enterprise solutions being sold at a fraction of their actual price, often through resellers masquerading as legitimate vendors. In the SaaS ecosystem, misuse takes subtler forms – such as license overuse, unauthorized API calls, credential stuffing, and cloning of proprietary software models.
From a comparative lens, India’s enforcement mechanisms have strengthened in recent years. Courts have become more proactive in granting Anton Piller orders, John Doe orders, and dynamic injunctions to block rogue websites. The IT Act and Rules coupled with the Copyright Act, provides a statutory framework for enforcement, and cybercrime units in metro cities are increasingly equipped to tackle software piracy, especially in B2B settings.
However, when compared with jurisdictions like the U.S., EU, or even Singapore, India still lags in certain areas- particularly in digital forensics, quick takedown protocols and cross-border enforcement cooperation. Lack of digital IP expertise in certain enforcement bodies and different judicial approaches to damages also pose challenges.
To combat this, software companies must take a multi-pronged strategy: strong, enforceable EULAs with audit rights; proactive license tracking using Software Asset Management (SAM) tools; deployment of digital watermarking and DRM technologies; and active online surveillance of infringing platforms. Legal action must often be supported by pre-suit investigations to establish unauthorized use, followed by civil enforcement and, where appropriate, criminal prosecution.
The most effective anti-piracy efforts globally involve a mix of litigation, technology, partnerships with enforcement agencies, and user education, something India is slowly but surely aligning itself.
You’ve also championed client interests during mediations at the Delhi High Court Mediation Centre. In your view, how effective is mediation in resolving complex IP disputes, and what role does it play in balancing commercial and legal interests?
Mediation, especially in the context of IP disputes, can be a remarkably effective tool when approached with the right mindset. At the Delhi High Court Mediation Centre, I’ve seen firsthand how it creates space for parties to move beyond rigid legal positions and engage in commercially meaningful dialogue. Unlike litigation, which is often adversarial and time-consuming, mediation allows for tailored, confidential, and business-sensitive solutions, making it particularly valuable in high-stakes IP matters.
In disputes involving brand reputation, time-to-market pressures or ongoing commercial relationships, mediation offers the flexibility to craft outcomes that litigation may not be equipped to provide, such as licensing arrangements, joint ventures, or mutually acceptable phased withdrawals. Pre-suit mediation, in particular, has emerged as a powerful tool to resolve conflicts early, avoid escalation, and maintain goodwill – saving time, cost, and reputational strain.
Ultimately, mediation helps balance legal rights with commercial realities. It empowers clients to co-create outcomes that serve both legal and business interests. In an IP landscape shaped by innovation and speed, mediation is increasingly becoming a strategic first step—particularly effective in resolving disputes early and efficiently, with the exception of aggravated cases of infringement or passing off that merit litigation.
Having advised multinational clients in sectors such as automotive, pharmaceuticals, e-commerce, and hospitality, what unique IP challenges have you seen in the automotive sector? What preventive strategies would you recommend to avoid trademark issues early on?
The automotive sector in India faces distinct IP challenges due to its vast supply chain, aggressive branding strategies, and a rapidly growing aftermarket ecosystem. Trademark infringement today extends beyond core brand names and registered marks to include sub-brands, model names, variant tags, and even alphanumeric identifiers. Infringers, particularly in the spare parts and accessories markets, routinely misuse these marks to falsely suggest association or compatibility to original vehicle manufacturers (the rightful IP holders). This not only dilutes brand equity but also risks consumer deception and safety, especially when counterfeit or substandard parts and accessories are involved.
A common defence invoked by unauthorised sellers is Section 30(2)(d) of the Trade Marks Act, which allows the use of a registered mark to indicate the intended purpose of a product or service (e.g., “compatible with Brand X”). However, this defence is not absolute. The protection under the provision ceases to apply where the use is not in accordance with honest industrial or commercial practices, or where it takes unfair advantage of or is detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of the mark. In the automotive space, this line is often crossed when infringers stylise logos, mimic trade dress, or market counterfeit parts under the guise of compatibility.
Design infringement is another major concern, especially with regard to spare parts like headlights, grills, mirrors, and alloy wheels. Many of these are reverse-engineered and sold in the grey market without authorization, undermining both brand value and consumer safety. Companies often fail to register industrial designs or delay doing so, weakening their enforcement stance in cases of replication by third-party manufacturer.
To address this, companies must actively monitor and enforce rights not just in their principal marks but also in model-specific and component-related branding, which are often more vulnerable. Registering sub-brands and variant names in relevant classes, including digital and retail categories, is key. Furthermore, legal notices and litigation should specifically challenge bad-faith use that exceeds the scope of Section 30(2) (d) focusing on consumer confusion, deceptive marketing, and reputational harm.
On the design front, preventive strategies include timely registration of industrial designs for high-risk components such as headlights, mirrors, grilles, and alloy wheels, especially those with distinctive visual appeal likely to be replicated. Companies should conduct regular design audits, embed subtle identifiers to support enforcement, and use border enforcement mechanisms to block infringing imports. Where misuse persists, design infringement lawsuits under the Designs Act, 2000—seeking injunctions, damages, and delivery of infringing goods—are vital tools to deter copycats and affirm rights. Combined with trademark enforcement, these steps help safeguard brand equity and product integrity across the automotive ecosystem.
You’ve often mentored and guided younger professionals. What advice would you offer to law students or litigators looking to shift to IP law, and what resources or habits can help them stay competitive and updated in this fast-evolving domain?
For law students or litigators looking to transition into IP law, my first piece of advice would be: ‘cultivate curiosity’.It is important to ground yourself in the fundamentals—copyrights, trademarks, patents, and designs but it is equally imperative to go beyond textbooks. Following case law developments and tracking decisions of various courts, as well as international bodies like WIPO and dispute resolution platforms like INDRP, is essential. These decisions not only reflect how the law is being interpreted in real time but also reveal emerging trends, judicial attitudes, and strategic nuances that shape IP enforcement and protection.
Using legal search engines like Manupatra and Westlaw, staying tuned into online news portals such as Live Law and Bar & Bench, and regularly reading blogs like SpicyIP and IPKat are excellent ways to stay updated. Newsletters, national and international legal magazines and webinars (hosted by bar associations or IP firms) also offer timely insights into evolving jurisprudence and policy shifts.
I would recommend interning with or working alongside seasoned practitioners. Many young professionals grow the most by observing and absorbing. Simply being in the room with experienced lawyers, watching how they interpret statutes, craft arguments and strategy and navigate court dynamics can shape your legal thinking in ways that are both subtle and lasting. Know the procedure as regards court filings and court practice. Most importantly, stay open to learning and listening whether from seniors, peers, or juniors. The humility will keep you sharp and grounded.
Balancing demanding professional responsibilities with personal well-being is no small feat. How do you manage this balance, and what practices or mindset have helped you stay grounded over the years?
Balancing the intensity of legal practice with personal well-being has been one of the most challenging and ongoing lessons of my career. In the early years, it was easy to get swept up in the long hours and high-pressure deadlines and the constant push to prove myself. But over time, I’ve come to realize that sustainability in this profession requires more than endurance, it needs intentionality, boundaries and deliberate pauses.
Balance comes from prioritizing high-impact tasks and pressing deadlines, while simultaneously planning a clear roadmap for research, preparation, and argument execution in other matters. This structured approach ensures that urgent work is handled efficiently without losing sight of long-term responsibilities, helping me stay steady, focused, and prepared across all fronts.
Spending time with family and friends, engaging in conversations beyond law, and learning to disconnect have become vital. Music, movies, and books are more than just breaks, they’re essential tools to break monotony, spark creativity, and keep me grounded.
From being mentored by senior lawyers to independently handling high-stakes litigation, your journey has been marked by growth and learning. What are some of the most valuable lessons you’ve carried forward, especially when it comes to leadership and courtroom advocacy?
Every journey has its highs and lows, and mine has been no exception. I did make my share of mistakes in the early years – be it in court, professional interactions, or even client handling. Each misstep became a valuable lesson. I learnt to face embarrassment, accept feedback, and grow from it. One of the most important lessons was to remain both tenacious in facing challenges and malleable enough to learn from seniors and peers—an essential balance not just at the start, but throughout one’s legal career.
I’m deeply grateful for the mentorship I received, especially from Mr. Achuthan Shreekumar, Mr. Saif Khan and Ms. Binny Kalra in my early years. They taught me to take full ownership of my work, to be meticulous in my preparation, and to argue with clarity, conviction, and courage. These values continue to guide me through complex matters and high-pressure situations in court with balance and self-belief.
Observing some of the finest legal minds during my legal career has been my privilege. It has helped me absorb the nuances of court craft, statutory interpretation, and legal strategy, often through a quiet process of osmosis.
Equally important have been the lessons in procedural rigour, understanding filings, registry practices, court processes, and client coordination. Perhaps most importantly, I’ve learned to listen, whether to seniors, peers, or juniors. Staying open and receptive has I’ve imbibed the importance of discipline, resilience, ethics, and a commitment to timeline – qualities that help build a legal culture that respects creativity, integrity, and innovation.
As a lawyer with cerebral palsy, you’ve spoken powerfully about inclusion and structural challenges. What changes would you like to see in the legal industry to make it more accessible, and how can organizations move from intent to implementation on this aspect?
Navigating the legal profession as a differently-abled lawyer has been a mixed journey. I’ve been fortunate to encounter mentors and colleagues who valued my credentials and potential over visible physical limitations. Despite the same, I’ve also faced scepticism—about whether I could handle the physical demands of litigation or keep pace in a high-pressure environment. These misconceptions stem from deeper social conditioning around disability and competence. The only real way to counter them is through consistent performance, meaningful outcomes, and quiet persistence.
Over time, I’ve realised the issue isn’t about access to opportunity. Many firms today are open to hiring professionals with disabilities, especially as diversity becomes a core organisational value. The real challenge lies in organisations being truly disability-cognizant beyond the point of entry.
Genuine inclusion means going beyond symbolic representation—it requires accessible infrastructure, assistive tech and software apps, flexible work schedules. Most importantly, more organisations need to invest in inclusive training across teams and levels and to build a culture rooted in empathy, understanding, and intentional dialogue. Equally important is addressing ‘disability blindness’—the expectation that disabled professionals meet identical performance standards without acknowledging their physical limitation or the systemic barriers they navigate. It must be understood that true inclusion lies in recognising difference, not ignoring it and creating conditions that enable success on equal terms.
Looking ahead, how do you see IP law evolving over the next decade, especially with the rise of AI-generated content, deepfakes, and non-traditional trademarks? What key reforms or innovations do you think are essential to future-proof the IP framework?
Over the next decade, IP law in India will be under mounting pressure to modernise in response to rapid technological advances. AI generated content fundamentally challenges the traditional copyright framework, which is centred on human authorship and originality. As machines autonomously create literary, artistic, and musical works, existing laws struggle to define ownership, liability, and infringement. To address this, regulatory clarity is essential either through specific amendments to the Copyright Act or by introducing sui generis protections tailored to AI generated and machine generated content.
To address deepfake misuse, India’s IP regime must strengthen personality rights to prevent unauthorized digital cloning of a person’s image, voice, or likeness, especially for commercial use. There must be an expansion of the scope of ‘misrepresentation’ under trademark and passing-off laws to cover deepfake endorsements or AI-generated impersonations that mislead consumers or dilutes brand identity.
Additionally, there must be an introduction of mandatory disclosure or watermarking requirements for AI-generated or manipulated content, especially on social media or commercial platforms, to ensure transparency and traceability. Lastly, there is a need of faster takedown mechanisms and intermediary liability guidelines tailored to AI and deepfake content under IP enforcement rules, empowering right holders to act swiftly.
Trademark law must evolve to protect non-traditional marks like sound, scent, motion, and holograms. With businesses increasingly operating in digital-first or virtual environments, including the metaverse, the law must address how trademarks function when use is no longer confined to physical goods or services. This will require not only legislative amendments but also updated examination guidelines, jurisprudence, and technological competence within the Trademark Registry and Judiciary.
