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.
I’ll start with the very, very important, and first and pertinent question, how and when did you decide to become a Barrister and an Advocate? And how was your journey? When did it start and how is it going? What kind of challenges have you faced still now?
Thank you for the question. Coming from Delhi, obviously it being the litigation hub, my school was right near the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court.
So it was always on the way to school. I would see the courts, the lawyers. It was very intriguing to me. And then, a funny anecdote, when I was in 11th or 12th, I remember I had taken commerce with maths and I was so traumatized with maths. Then the next question came, where can I make money where math won’t be required and I don’t have to use trigonometry.
So there were few options which came out of which, again, law came, so I thought, might as well. Maybe that’s destiny. So that was the main reason why I started with law. It was a very stupid excuse, I must say, but everything’s written. I went to the UK. I was in University of Warwick where I did my undergrad, LLB. Unlike India, there what you do is you learn the substantive law in your undergrad. That is your LLB. That’s for three years. And then you either become a barrister or a solicitor, wherever you learn the procedural aspects. So solicitors are the ones who work in law firms. They are the ones who interact with the clients who make your witness statements or draft your petition. Barristers are a bit of a different side of the disputes.
Barristers are the ones who have the right of audience. That means they’re the ones who argue in court. So the training to be a barrister is quite different. It’s more about reading skills. It’s more of technicality and more into law. I mean, I’m sure both require their own sets of skills. Being a solicitor on the original side and being able to deduce that evidence from the client is a separate art, which barristers don’t have to do because then the paperwork already comes to them and you have to apply your brain just towards the right affording suspect.
So I was trained to be a barrister there, which opened my insights a lot. The way of education that we got there was quite different. Coming from a CBSE background where in our board exams, we were required to write probably a 300 word essay and suddenly entering into this university where within the first week I’m given an assignment to write a 3000 word essay.
It was challenging for all of us. I still remember, okay, so I wrote that essay and then they were like, but this is already there in the book. Like, what do you want? Law is already there and I’m giving you the law. And that’s where they taught me what analytical thinking was. And I think it was very important. Honestly, coming from the CBSE background, I did find it a bit disadvantageous, initially.
Took me a year to grasp and understand how this functions, how the essay writing functions, how do you write 5,000 words when you can do the same for 500 words. That’s also an art. Yeah, it was a very different form of education system. Some things I would say they should learn from India and some things I would really suggest India should learn from them.
Like when I was trying to be a barrister, we used to have recorded sessions of cross-examination or examination in chief or client handling. The biggest thing is client handling. What questions do you need to ask your clients while also protecting yourself under the ethical rules?
Like a simple thing if you’re doing mainly criminal trials. You won’t ask him a question, did you do it? Because the moment you say that and he answers that question to you, you can’t now take a not guilty plea. So ethical standards also come around, I’m sure. So these are things I’m not saying people have mal intention or anything, but these are things that need to be taught.
Problem is, I don’t see in Indian law schools that are being taught, I was fortunate enough to have been taught that. And whenever I have interns, I always tell them that when you’re talking to a client, be very careful because it is a double edged sword. Anything and everything that they reveal to you, though it is bound by attorney client privilege, but you also have the advocates Act and you need to be careful in navigating your way through both of them, by using it harmoniously.
So these are a few things that I learned there, how it was different. Then obviously after doing law, I was really motivated to come back to India because I love my country. I love the way things function. It may be chaotic, but I love the chaos. So I decided to take that leap of faith and coming back to India. I remember I was with Mr.Ciccu sir, in Delhi for a couple of years, one and a half years or so, where, I mean, I was exposed to the world of arbitrations, which was a very new ballgame. And, considering I was a barrister, so I had the license to practice in arbitration, so until I get my formal license in India to practice, so that way it was better for me to do that.
A very good experience in international arbitrations. And then I moved to Bombay, took another leap of faith, left my hometown Delhi, and then moved to a completely different city, the financial capital of India. It was an eyeopener. It taught me a lot. AZB was amazing that way. The work was high pressure, I won’t lie, but what you learn in a short span of time is invaluable because you have such volumes of cases and the type of cases.
There are humongous disputes for hundreds and thousands of crores. How a big firm functions, how 20 lawyers put their brain in one case. And, yeah, I mean, it was a very good learning process and that way Bombay has been kind and cruel at the same time. It always uses the carrot and stick story.
If you screw around, you’ll get beaten. If you’re nice, you get that carrot. So yeah, it’s been a good journey so far.
Keeping that in mind, in the early stages of your career, you gained invaluable experiences with Senior Advocate, Ciccu Mukhopadhaya, the kind of challenges you may have faced because you were transitioning from UK to India and the way it works over here, how did these kind of experiences contribute to your understanding of the kind of arbitrations that we do on national, or rather domestic level and international arbitration; so how do you see your transition along with the transition of arbitration itself?
I mean, true, like you said, arbitration has scaled great heights in India.
When I moved from the UK, I remember doing some internships in mini pupilages in the UK especially. The most notable one was Blackstone Chambers that I was there, I was fortunate enough to assist the seniors that time. The Queen’s Council now King’s councils in the Gina Miller case, though, not an arbitration, but it was Gina Miller is the famous Brexit case.
So there I saw barristers sitting one entire month on one case. So as a new law student, that is something very new, how well prepared you all are, and even the competition is as well prepared. India has a very different work game. I’m not comparing the two of anything about competency or quality.
Both require a different set of skills. They are shocked when they see Indian senior counselors appearing in five cases in a day. They’re like how is this possible? Here one barrister is sitting for an entire month for one case. How is this person doing five appearances in one day. It’s shocking to know. It requires a different set of skills to do. When I started litigation, the moment I came back to India, that switch was quite different.
It was shocking. It was amazing how in chaos they are still functioning properly. That was an eye opener how this is happening. Now, specific context of arbitrations. During that time, international arbitrations were growing. Now I foresee a dip in the arbitrations because of a lot of things.
A, how the government is also taking a not so pro arbitration stand now, with more than INR 10 crores of government contracts removing the arbitration clause. Stamp duties being imposed on awards. Very high stamp duties, especially like now, the recent Maharashtra Stamp Act, so it will hinder arbitration going forward. Considering also the list of non arbitrability of disputes being expanded.
It has come to a point. It feels like sometimes nothing is applicable. But yeah, talking about that golden period when I was here with Ciccu sir, very amazing. It was like dust. So anywhere you hit a case law is gonna get settled about different parts of things, be it seat versus venue obligations, be it pre-enforcement deposits.
And then set aside the definition of patent illegality being expanded and then again being narrowed down, the stamping of arbitration issue. These all are really enthralling issues which have been taken the course of arbitration in India. Specifically with Ciccu sir, I was fortunate to assist him in international arbitrations.
The most fond memory I have was when I went to Paris with him for a CIAC arbitration. So the biggest question everyone asked was, oh, why Paris if it’s CIAC? So the seat and venue argument again comes out there that Paris was the venue, that Singapore is the seat, substantive law is theIndian contract Act.
So three 3 types of law, procedural, substantive, and the seat (jurisdictional). So it was enthralling to witness how SIAC functions at an international level. We had all the top arbitrators in the world in that, the biggest names that you can understand, how professionally it was being conducted, how every line was being transcribed, was very important to see.
And the best part was in the night, our job was to inspect if everything’s written is right or not, because by chance there’s an issue. Then how witnesses were cross examined, how the Chinese walls were always maintained regardless of how they are based, that there is no intimidation or anything going on.
It was a very good experience and you learn different facets of law. When you go for enforcement or set aside how Singapore views it and how India views it. India, I would still say has a bit more broader scope than Singapore, but maybe it’s needed because it’s different geographical, geopolitical, demographic issues that we have here.
Considering now that argument, which is going on in the Supreme Court regarding, section 34, that is a set aside application should they be allowed to modify the award. Now that is something which is, I don’t know what the Supreme Court’s going to say because I have views on both sides.
If you allow them to modify it, then very well, because otherwise what happens, the moment you set aside, you go back to clock zero and you stop. But the moment you get the power, the modify, then what’s the point, there is a normal court proceeding where you’re giving appellate powers. So it’s a very difficult thing. The scope in India, and at least in the last 10 years since the amendment has come, the act after 96 close to 18 years, that amendment came 18, 19 years. Since then, a lot of things have changed. Arbitration was booming. Maybe with these recent amendments or the government stand and the highest stamp duty, it may take a hit. But if you want to have India as a very high on the charts on the ease of doing business, we have to be pro arbitration.
So that is my takeaway from the last 7 to 8 years of practice in arbitration.
How did you decide to start your own law firm, your own chambers, and what was the motivation behind it? And the kind of challenges? I’m pretty sure you must have faced. We request you to share some of those with the kind of solutions that you came up with because you started this at such an early age. It’ll be very beneficial for our learners to understand how they can also brush themselves to go through this particular path.
Sure. I mean, I was fortunate enough to become a barrister at the age of 21, 22. So I was quite young when I already had all the accolades. I had an undergrad and I had a barrister degree. I was just 22. So I moved to India at that time. I was one of the youngest in the course also there, everyone else is 26, 27 or 29.
I was the only kid there. So it helped me mature up faster because the people around me are all 5, 7 years elder to me. I was in AZB. Like I said, the matters were so big that 20 lawyers are working on it. But then somehow I just felt that I’m not getting to do the work that I wanted. Because of such magnanimity, you’re not able to do the entire work.
Though everyone is given a specific job, otherwise it’s not going to get done. Only the partner knows the entire case holistically. Otherwise, you all are doing your separate job as needed. So I realized that, let me just understand this. And, I really have the hunger to learn and do cases from start to finish.
I’ll make the index and make the list of dates and draft the petition. I want to argue also. Everything I wanted to do. I want to do it. So I had that little kid in me who never thought things through that time, I was young, so maybe, one day I just decided that no, I don’t want to be a small part of a big project.
I’d rather do the entire project by myself regardless of how small it is. The kid in me never sought advice from anyone also, it was just a pure instinct move and I left. And life taught me a lot of things that way. One case led to another. One thing I learned, you need to be fearless. Fearlessness and stupidity have a very thin line, so you got to be careful there as well.
You got to take your steps slowly, but calculative, but also not be scared. Because the moment you venture out in independent practice, there are a lot of things that you need to be careful of. It’s not just your ego that you want to do it alone. It’s the client’s case at risk. Sometimes it is their freedom if you’re doing bails, sometimes it is their hard earned money if you’re doing a civil case, sometimes it is their house if you’re doing a redevelopment agreement and the issues that come around there, it is their house. If you do it wrong now he’s going to be homeless. So there’s a lot of pressure also, high stake pressure there. You should never be afraid of asking help from anyone. Never think that if you’re asking from help, maybe you’re getting demeaned.
Your job is to ask for help. I remember catching anyone in the Bombay Bar and going and meeting and started talking to them. I still remember 4 years ago, my first office was the High Court library. Because, I couldn’t afford to buy so many books. All these books are very expensive.
Bombay real estate is very expensive. Anywhere you go to rent an office, it’s really expensive. And I was that time around 25, 26, and I didn’t feel right to take money from my father. I’m an independent guy and I had my savings a little bit from a AZB, I thought, let me venture this out. So I’ve seen it from the ground up.
From my days of having my first office in the High Court library with the rotating chairs, whoever sat in your chair, has sat now. So no fixed office that way. So I would think positively, I’d say I have many offices and I have a huge collection of books, which is for free. So that’s where it started.
One thing led to another. You got to be courageous. You got to learn throughout your life. Like you said, I’m very young and I would consider myself to be a student of law forever because law is something where you learn something new every day. Today I may know the law and the other person might come up with a new argument, which is intriguing.
Then I’ll learn something. And the same thing even I have done. Sometimes I might think this is a very foolish argument, but I have won the case on that. I don’t know how judge saw sense in it. Maybe I wasn’t seeing it. So it was a very enthralling experience. Because I didn’t have foresight of which type of case is going to come to me, any client who would repose faith in me and took over that case.
So maybe that way I became fortunate enough to have a very expansive field of practice. I remember doing IBC, oppression mismanagement. I remember having a client who came to me for Armed Forces Tribunal. I have nothing to do with Armed Forces Tribunal, like I’ve been only a commercial litigation lawyer.
It was a very enthralling experience. Then I remember a friend came to me for his share subscription agreement, and lucky for him, he got selected by the Y Combinator and now he has raised a hundred million. So through his journey, like when he was in the nascent stage I did that share subscription, but every round he came back to me because then I understood the startup game, how it is going, what are the common pitfalls businesses face?
What are the challenges founders face? What are the challenges investors face? What are the regulatory requirements that they always overlook? What are the employment law requirements that they generally overlook? And I’m a very big fan of tech, so I keep a note of all of it. So it’s a very good database for me also to sit and analyze across industries so that way the other startups also started.
So they started with the STEM toys and gaming, gambling, then drone tech, health tech. And as lawyers, one thing I’ve always suggested is not just about the law. It is you need to understand the industry better than your client, because then only he’s going to respect you. Only when you know his industry better than him is when he’ll understand, okay, you understand my problem genuinely.
It’s not just the law that you’re telling me. This even online I can see. So it’s very important for you to understand the industry that they’re in. What is the issue in that industry? Because how you say, what is a startup? It’s a innovative or an inventive way of finding solution to a problem. Now, first you should see why haven’t other people done it?
Is it so difficult? Are you Einstein? How did you come up with this? There should be some issue why they’re not doing it. Is there a legal issue? Does the law not allow It? Are the taxes too high? Are the cess too high in that industry? Maybe there’s a high GST. Maybe that’s why it’s not working. Maybe something like Bitcoin where the government is only not clear whether it’s legal or illegal, but yet put 28% tax on it.
So the model is only not viable. So all these things you need to advise clients, even though you’re not expected to know this, but you will only be able to serve your client to the best of interest when you know all these things. So that’s what I’ve learned in my humble experience till now.
It has been a good journey. I hope it gets better.
We would request you to share your experience about how you get called to the Bar by The Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn, the kind of things that one has to do in his or her legal career for that particular qualification of getting as a barrister, it’ll also help the learners, and I would request you also, in case you have some insight about the SQE qualifications, which usually Indian lawyers can qualify and register themselves over there and practice in UK because you already have seen that particular world, there is a possibility that we’ll get to know more about it, obviously from the firsthand experience?
Sure. I mean, I can’t comment much on SQE, but SQE is always, that’s a solicitor route. I think they have changed the name also now. They keep on changing names. Can’t help it. Even for a barrister, during my time it was BPTC.
Now it is BVC, BFC. I don’t know. They keep on changing God knows for what reason, but yeah solicitor is obviously the easiest way for Indians. If you’re going to migrate to the UK. You won’t get right of audience. solicitors don’t have right of audience. You can practice in the lowest court that is a magistrate court or the crown court.
But not above that, above that you need to take another exam or something through which you may get a right of audience. But having said that, for Indians, generally people who are going there, if you think a law firm is the safest bet for you, of course, you would rather do the SQE than do the barrister because obviously you have jobs in law firms which are better paying and more secure.
You might have to work a lot. But obviously it’s way more secure and you have a fixed pay. Coming to the barrister side. First, I’ll just give you a highlight of the process, at least during my time how it was. For us, if we had to do an undergrad in the UK, LLB and then do this, or there’s one more thing called GDL, that is a one year, super law course, as I call it. So we do all the subjects in one year, all the major subjects are trust, law, contract law, Tort law, and criminal. These are the major ones, which everyone has to do. There may be some electives you’ll have to take, but all within one year, so very daunting. For Indian lawyers maybe you can write to the Bar Standards Board, that is the BSB, there to seek an exemption, saying that you have studied, that India is also a common law jurisdiction. How contract law is an act given by them. Mostly the principles. The principles are the same everywhere, in any common law jurisdiction. So if we can make an argument and show that you have some years of practice and seek an exemption from doing the GDL or anything, then comes the course or the BPTC course, maybe whatever the new acronym that they have put in now, I don’t know. So in that, what happens is that, A is that you get into that course. Second is you become a member of one of the four inns of court. So that’s Gray’s Inn, Middle Temple, Inner Temple and Lincoln’s Inn. So from Lincoln’s Inn, you have our Jawaharlal Nehru, from Middle Temple you have Sardar Patelji, from Gray’s Inn we have Mr.Ambedkar. That’s why personally, I had chose Gray’s Inn because of that, since it was the smallest and the youngest. Lincoln’s Inn is the oldest and the biggest. There comes your Inner temple where you had Gandhiji. So, I mean, you become a member of these four inns of court. Some people have their interview process also.
It’s a process that you need to apply, get recommendations. Interviews are being conducted and then you are admitted as a member of the inns of court. So now to get the big call to a bar, you need to do 12 qualifying sessions in the inns of court, which can range from dinners to moots to lectures to trial to mock trials, anything. These all happen in their ancient old halls, which are like all 500 years old or 600 years old. Halls like if you have seen Harry Potter, how they dine. So that dining shoot has happened in Lincoln’s Inn. So that’s how we all barristers used to dine. We all used to go on our big gowns.
And then there’s your master’s table where there’s the king’s councilors and the queen’s councilors and the guests for that time dinner or lecturers come and then we all would sit in sets of two students and two practicing barristers. So that way we could also communicate. We would get to know people in the fraternity.
We get to know their experience. They might also impart some wisdom to us. It was nice. Then comes the hardest part, which are the exams. So your course starts sometime in September and till May, so roughly 6 months, 6 to 8 months. During this period from Jan onwards, your exams will start.
So every month expect to have 3 exams. The exams would be like arbitration. And here all the procedural law comes. Like, remember when I told you the substantive as an undergrad, procedure is there, so your CRPC, CPC, arbitration. Then comes your opinion writing, drafting, cross-examination, examination in chief, presenting an application.
Then comes ethics. So these all courses are there, and you have to get a minimum 60% in each to pass. No one gets above 80, so you need to fall in that middle bracket of 60 to 80. They fail you by one mark also. And the first thing that you hear when you enter the barrister courses, look to your left, look to your right 30% will run away by next month. That is a normal thing. But yeah, it’s fruitful. The experience is fruitful and when you come out you also see the change in you, how your skills have been sharpened, how pinpointed questions you ask and how you present yourself in court. Before the course and after the course are a very different experience.
And I can say this because I know lawyers who were lawyers in Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and they have come here and done this course, they’ve been practicing for 10 years. They themselves shared that their skills are now sharpened.
You’ve had exposure to global jurisdictions through your legal journey — what major changes did you notice in yourself through this process, and what motivated your return to India? How did you navigate the transition back, and did your familiarity with Delhi help? Additionally, how did you develop the skill of reading clients and understanding the psychology behind cases and businesses?
So, like I said, these are courses that have to be taught in India. So we were taught this day in and day out, so every week we used to have a recorded lecture, like I’m sitting with a professional actor and doing cross-examination or interview of the client, conducting an interview of when he or she has come and told me like I have to prep them for the cross-examination tomorrow.
So I’m like, okay, come, let’s sit. I’ll ask you a few questions you have to answer. You need to understand what question not to ask. And you’re trained in? These things are very important. People in India always say we will learn through practice. Even if I was in India, I would also like to learn through practice, I can read about it.
But I didn’t know there were books like these. There are very nice books written out there regarding opinion writing or client management or conducting cross-examination, even for pleadings. I remember the first book I bought was How to Plead Without Tears. I’m forgetting the author, but that was the title of the book, the first book I borrowed from the library.
So these are things, like I said, when I was in India, I didn’t know of this. Once I went there and when a professional actor, and usually the teachers are the ones who are practicing barristers, so these are part-time teachers, technically they’re only coming for that one course. And then going back to their practicing scene.
So they would give their personal anecdotes, give you more wisdom, and that is very important in shaping my ideology also. Second thing is how in India people take a lot of their friends, family cases. Though it is not illegal, the Advocates Act only doesn’t allow you to appear for blood relatives.
But generally what they taught me and why I clearly agree was especially in litigation, if not corporate, is you should be fully independent. The moment you have a client in litigation with whom you have a personal relation or anything, it’s not that it is illegal or anything, I would say that your judgment is clogged because then you start taking it personally.
And also you are not being true to the ethical values because if you see your duty towards the court is paramount, it’s above your duty towards the client. That’s what the advocates act also says. When you have somewhat vested interest. I’m not saying monetary only because he’s your friend, maybe you’re a bit more emotional about that case.
Maybe it’s your relative, you’re a bit more emotional. It clouds your judgment. You’re not able to understand the counter-arguments, and that’s when the other lawyer who is totally independent will get the better of you. Because more often than not in court, you can write 10,000 pages of pleadings.
The judge is only gonna listen to you, to the council. So 90% is a council, 10% obviously, you can’t plead facts, which you haven’t submitted in your pleadings, but as to law especially. Unless you are independent, your judgment will be clogged. And that’s my personal experience . And that’s the main thing that I was taught there.
And I completely agree with that.
Over the course of your career, you have appeared in various cases at the Supreme Court of India as well, which are of significant matter. If you don’t mind sharing some of the highlights of a few intriguing cases, also, the kind of complexities and how you navigate through that whole process.
Because as you were trained to do that particular research at length, how have you made sure that you do it in a limited period of time that is given to you, and how have you navigated the whole process?
Actually more than that, I would add one more. Not just a limited period of time, but also the limited period of speaking time that you get in the court.
The Supreme court is a very different practice than any other court, unless you are a very known face of how like the big stalwarts are, the court wants to listen to them. Everyone in the audience also wants to listen to them. When Mr. Sibal talks, Mr. Singhvi talks, all these all these are like songs when they’re talking, we are like please keep going, even if it is for hours because we get to learn so much from them.
When someone like me steps in, who still has only one or two gray hair, they don’t listen to you. They’ll give you probably 2 minutes, 5 minutes if they are generous, or maybe it’s very contentious. The longest I’ve gone is half an hour, and as we know, 9 out of 10 cases are thrown on the pre notice change. In the Supreme Court there’s a very old saying, if you have notice issued then 80% of the case is won. Then you get to know if your true counsel, if you’re able to get the case dismissed after the notice is issued, because getting the notice issue is a very high threshold. Something like the Supreme Court, I mean cases which are very close to my heart is one I remember I argued, Lieutenant’s matter.
I was fortunate enough to appear before the Additional Solicitor General of India. We had a lot of heated arguments. It was a matter of Article 21 right to life. My client was paralyzed and he was being invalidated from service and also asked to leave the hospital. Where will a paralyzed man go?
That was the biggest thing. Where do we let the paralyzed man go? We can’t just leave him on the streets. So that was a very interesting argument. He brought in Article 21. We used a little bit of our own brain process, like they were throwing him out of the hospital. And I started asking for a release, which relates to US surgery.
I took them to the US and the judge, I remember Deepanker Dutta was there and he’s like, you want surgery in the US? Where do you think you are? This is in India, like this, do you think we send everyone to the US? So then I was like, okay sir, please give it to me in AIMS only then. He’s like he is already in a government hospital now, I was like but they’re removing him, and he’s like no, no, he can be there. That’s what I ultimately wanted.
So it was good. So that was one case that I’m really proud of. That was my first pro bono case. I thought at least I did whatever I could for the client, unfortunately he is no more. Then another, I remember my first case was against Mr. M.R.Shah, it was small, I mean, I won’t consider it small that way. It was a very small point of law where the workers were supposed to be given compensation.
Poor workers were being tortured and tormented. Somewhere in 2002 during construction, they fell. One person severed their hand, 20 people fell like that, and the contractor and the agency weren’t giving them their insurance amount. I remember I appeared before Mr.M.R.Shah And no one appeared for the respondents.
He asked me pinpointed questions. And before me, mine was serial number 11, I remember, the first 10 were dismissed. First 10 were dismissed, or no one got notice issued. I was there and the respondents didn’t appear. He grilled me for 10 minutes and I was like, why is this guy doing this to me?
These are poor people. And I was still young. I was just 26, 27 years old. These are poor people, they deserve their thing, unnecessarily this appeal has been filed too after a delay, and the High Court for reasons best known to them allowed the appeal. So after I filed this, he grilled, grilled, grilled.
Then suddenly I saw an order where he has given me, he has issued notice, and he has written some good things about me like counsel vehemently argued. So these small pleasures of life that you enjoy. You like why you are doing this job. Law is something which is…, I mean, sure monetary aspect is there, but you can’t join this profession, especially litigation if you are just looking at the monetary aspect because more often than not, you will have many clients who cannot afford, but you really wanna help them because ultimately they have no other way to get justice.
So council practice is very different, and if you’re only looking at the monetary aspect, I would suggest don’t get to council practice that easily unless you have a lot of monetary support.
I’m pretty sure you must have gone through a lot of these kinds of exciting cases where you not only learn, but others also have learned from you. Can you share your experience about advising the investors and acting as an external legal counsel, especially for drone tech manufacturers, and you are also involved in the agricultural sector, the drone use in the agricultural sector.
How have you approached that? What kind of due diligence is conducted? The kind of agreements that are made, or how do you actually address the issues or challenges in these legal fees, which are actually emerging industries. How have you gotten into this and how do you see that technology is going to be a change factor for legal practice itself?
See, tech is coming and everywhere, everything nowadays tech is being added. Legal tech is there. Drone tech is there. The other day I met someone who was into spiritual tech. I don’t know what that means. I dunno what that means but I’m intrigued to know, like you specifically asked about drone tech.
And actually recently I met another client, which is into anti drone tech. He is like everyone’s making a drone, I’ll make an anti drone. So it’s very interesting what’s going on. Specifically if you talk about agritech in combination with drone tech, a lot of things come in, A, obviously licensing. You can’t just fly a drone.
You need your DGCA license. You need licensed pilots, you need trained pilots. You need a proper training school. You need to make sure that the data that you are collecting, you have taken consent. Consent is most important. And, the DPDP act, though it has come, the rules haven’t come, so you’re not able to enforce it.
Some people have already found loopholes. Some people are like, okay, tech as if it is online, I’m gonna write a ticket for it, and then process the data. So unless case laws come, we can’t navigate through all this. A lot of SPDI rules, information tech. Now drones are also flying. Now a lot of times happened like, had an instance scenario where the drone fell and it burned the entire crop.
Who is liable? Insurance company saying we are not liable to pay because we covered the drone catching on fire and falling while we are not responsible for this crop. And fortunately, unfortunately, everything was dry grass. What do you do? The villagers have tied the pilot who had come to fly the drone.
They’re not leaving him, giving the money back. So these are complex issues which come around. You have to navigate, you have to get proper insurance and such things. You need to make sure that the testing for the drone is right. The pilot who’s been given the drone is safe, secure, properly licensed.
The data that you’re using, you have full consent to, not only to collect, but also to monetize it. Otherwise, tomorrow you might have a claim from the landowner who will say, I’m also part owner of this data. Such complications are always going to come. You need to make sure that there’s a proper title towards those drones as well.
A lot of people imagine that the drone falls where it is, the drone is 10 kilometers away from you. A lot of people take the parts and run away. That also happens. Someone say, this is mine. So security also has to be taken care of. It’s a very niche industry that you need to take care of. I need to also, every time, sit with the founders and see what their vision is.
Is your job just to spray pesticides through a drone? Covering 20 kilometers? Fair. Is your job also to put an infrared camera and see what is the output of this? Where all is the pesticide spraying, where it is spraying, where the output coming is less or more. All these are important issues which need to ask the founders as to how they are gonna navigate.
Do they plan on having this and monetizing this, or they just want to set up a company? So all these questions need to ask in accordingly, different, different acts coming. So it has to do a lot with what the founder’s vision is. If you have very low business capacity and very low investment, maybe just a simple drone with the pesticide you will need to just spray it.
You wanna go through a high tech process, output data, input data, get every small thing about the crop. Is this crop good, viable? What vegetable should grow there? This all requires a lot of SPDI rules. DPDP rules, information tech rules. A lot of things happen.
Given your diverse national and international experience, what advice would you offer to legal aspirants entering tech-related fields, especially in terms of necessary qualities, strategic preparation, and managing mental health alongside the demands of a legal career?
See, obviously, law, especially litigation as a profession, I would suggest only do it if you have the passion for it. And especially when you are independent, like how I am. Work-life balance has no meaning only. If you don’t have work, you’ll be sitting in anxiety.
If you have work, you’ll be very grateful to God and you’ll work till 4 am also. So for me, I just can’t relate to it. Maybe when I was working in a law firm, yeah. I would say, oh, why am I getting called at 2:00 AM in the night? I don’t wanna work, I wanna sleep. Now I get a call at 2:00 AM the night. Yes, of course I’ll be there.
So it’s very different perspectives. The day I left and I saw I’m loving what I’m doing, I work any hour because I get that excitement. Until you’re getting that excitement, everything seems like a chore then I mean, you won’t wanna do it as and when you like. So only enter this profession if you have that passion. Second, you have to keep your diet very well, because the problem with this is we are in a desk job.
This is all a desk job, so use bound to gain weight, especially the way things are out here now. Eating outside, unhealthy, unfiltered, questionable oil food. It’s going to take a toll on your mental health because the only way your physical health is fine is when this is going to be fine. And considering with so much involvement of technology and everything, mental health does take a huge shift.
So always suggest everyone to keep everything disciplined. Learn to work out for at least half an hour a day. Eat healthy, eat home food. Best part, nothing will happen. If you eat home, you eat puri at home, it’s fine as long as it’s home food. The outside oil you don’t know what’s in there, They’re cooking in the same oil for 10 days.
Second, obviously the passion has to be there and everything ultimately flows from the Constitution. I have it right here. This is the father of everything, every time you have a doubt. What is this law? I’m not understand. Read from where it has come. It has to come from the Constitution, only the Constitution gives that authority, the power to make that law. So the day you understand Constitutions. All your issues regarding complexity of laws will go and any new law which also comes, you will know how to understand it if you understand the Constitution. So every law student, I always suggest that constitutional law is not just for someone who practices in the red jurisdictions or only the Supreme Court.
It is for everyone because you could be doing corporate anything, but to interpret that statute, you need to understand the Constitution, and this is the golden rule for everything.
A legal career can hold different meanings for different people. What inspired you to pursue law as a career, and what was the driving force behind your decision to take this path? How did your journey through law school further ignite your passion for the field and shape your motivations for the future?
My journey to law began against the backdrop of family tradition pointing elsewhere. Three successive generations of civil engineers in my family (including both my parents), had established a legacy in public service and infrastructure – particularly, water supply, a cause to which both my father and grandfather had committed a large portion of their lives. While I was tempted to lean into this “flow” state, following them into a set career as an engineer working in infrastructure or environmental sciences, my interests as a student actually leaned towards aerospace engineering and all things space-related.
Frankly, it was my grandmother who ultimately inspired my legal path, and acted as a guiding light. It was in the late 1940s that she had graduated with a law degree from Government Law College, Mumbai (then-Bombay) having lost a few years to the Indian freedom movement. She continued to maintain kinships with notable alumni like Soli Sorabjee and Nani Palkhiwala whom she had met in study groups – on occasion she would narrate several anecdotes about them and their time at law college. Soon after graduating however, she chose family life over a demanding legal career – a decision she later expressed regret about before passing in 2024 at age 97. Despite never having practiced law as a member of the Bar, her legal training permeated her daily life. Her sharp wit, articulation and ability to debate confidently at length with eminent personalities and champions of industry left me with profound respect for the legal profession and even fostered a sense of reverence for litigating lawyers. There was something meaningful about pursuing a career she had not been able to follow.
Law school quickly dispelled my romantic and innocent notions about legal practice. No number of anecdotes or choice phrases could replace the intellectual rigour and stamina required for law school. Law school demanded a sharpened focus and genuine eagerness to learn, qualities that developed gradually during my studies. What transformed my experience were approachable professors, commercially relevant courses and real-world internships that revealed how legal strategy truly functions in practical application.
I became particularly interested in dissecting and analysing business structures and strategies in the form of case studies, similar to investigative journalism. I was taken in, almost jonesing on the access to information that legal training provided me – corporate filings, audit reports, public disclosures – told compelling stories that captivated me more than fiction. This fascination further accelerated me towards corporate law, built on the fundamental understanding of how legal frameworks shape industries and business strategy.
After completing your law degree, you chose to pursue a master’s from Durham University, United Kingdom. Given the number of esteemed institutions offering similar programs, what made Durham stand out as the ideal choice for you? Could you share how your experience there enriched both your academic and professional journey?
Choosing Durham University for graduate school was an easy decision. As one of the UK’s ancient universities alongside Oxford, Cambridge and St. Andrews – often collectively referred to as “Doxbridge” – Durham offered prestigious academic standing with its #4 UK ranking that year. This was a deciding factor as I was only looking for universities in the UK. Further, having missed application deadlines for Oxbridge, Durham represented excellence within my available options.
Another important consideration for me was the collegiate system at Durham that really attracted me – with each college maintaining its distinct history and culture. My acceptance to Castle College, Durham’s founding and oldest college was particularly transformative for me. The “Castleman” culture, shaped by centuries of tradition, encouraged by academic excellence and strong professional camaraderie was an unmatched value addition. Studying within a medieval castle – one that had served as a filming location for Harry Potter was an immersive experience in itself. Formal dinners in historical halls and galleries complete with ceremonial or academic gowns, connected learning to centuries of scholarly tradition.
Academically, Durham provided the perfect platform for refining and deepening my skills in commercial law. A key highlight was being taught Mergers & Acquisitions by Shaun Goodman, a Kirkland & Ellis’s London partner – easily one of the sharpest minds I had encountered. His nuanced perspective and practical insight into corporate acquisition strategy, execution modes and financing structures were invaluable. This blend of theoretical depth and real-world commercial application, prepared me for complex high stakes legal transactions that were around the corner for me in law firm life.
The Durham experience extended beyond coursework – instilling qualities that continue to shape my professional approach and work ethic: focus on analysis over verbosity or precedent, adaptability in unique situations, collegiality in professional relationships, and a broader sense of purpose and achievement in legal work. These elements remain foundational to my practice today.
In the early stages of your career, you had the privilege of working with several prestigious law firms, including Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas and Trilegal, as well as co-founding Digi-Smart Technologies. What were the pivotal learning moments during these formative years that not only deepened your understanding of the law but also set you on the path toward excellence in your profession?
My early years across law firms provided a crucible which forged my practice. At Trilegal, I was immediately thrust into representing a major multinational technology player interested in strategic acquisitions across the Indian tech sector as well as a USD 100 billion+ AUM private equity fund – both deploying approximately USD 8 billion in capital across Indian markets over a spread of deals in distinct sectors within aggressive timelines. This experience, building upon my foundational two years of private equity experience at Desai & Diwanji, revealed that excellence in complex high stakes transactions requires more than technical proficiency; it demands strategic vision that anticipates challenges before they materialize.
What proved invaluable to me was navigating these transactions with a lean, efficient, high performing team united by shared principles – rigorous work ethic (read: hard work), unwavering integrity and meticulous attention to detail. It became clear to me that the quality of collaboration often determines transaction success more definitively than individual brilliance. The diversity of perspectives and backgrounds among the exceptional professionals I worked with expanded my own professional toolkit exponentially, teaching me that legal solutions emerge not just from following set precedent but from creative problem solving. Our camaraderie naturally also seeped into our personal lives and I can’t underscore the importance of maintaining strong friendships while working in high stress settings.
At Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, assisting on a private equity buyout of a major education provider across the preschool to K-12 segment while simultaneously handling my first listed acquisition – a control deal in the highly regulated cement sector revealed the multidimensional nature of complex transactions that intersect with governance, policy and public interest. Both these matters inter alia required synchronising national, state, local and international regulatory frameworks while identifying inconsistencies between them. Dissecting legal risks several financial quarters in advance and advising on mitigation strategies and pragmatic solutions and structures. This experience crystalised my understanding that superior deal counsel must operate as regulatory cartographers – mapping jurisdictional and legislative complexities while charting clear paths forward.
Having worked at prominent law firms, such as Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas and Trilegal, what motivated you to transition into an in-house role with Euronet Worldwide, Inc? How did you perceive the cultural shift between working at a law firm and being part of a corporate in-house team, and how did your responsibilities evolve in this new environment?
My transition to an in-house role at Euronet was driven by a fundamental desire to participate in business strategy and decision making from inception rather than merely documenting or assisting with decision already made. While law firm practice offered technical depth, I found myself increasingly drawn to the strategic questions that precede formal legal engagement. Having already done a masters’ degree, an MBA seemed excessive and unaffordable and I had often heard inhouse roles being equated to an MBA education.
The cultural shift from law firm to inhouse was stark and multidimensional. In private practice, client interactions typically begin after commercial parameters are already established – the classic “deal is agreed in principle between principals, now it’s the lawyers job to document it” scenario. At Euronet, I experienced the inverse, legal counsel became integral to opportunity identification, market entry strategy and risk assessment months or even years before external counsel may be engaged or a term sheet even considered. This shift from a reactive to proactive counsel demanded developing “commercial intuition” – the ability to anticipate business or revenue implications beyond legal analysis.
This perspective aligns with what a senior partner at a previous firm I worked at once described as the evolution from “legal technician to business strategist”. It took a lot of effort to create trust for counsel to be seen as business enablers rather than gatekeepers, but once this trust was established, the rewards to the company and stakeholders were self-generating.
During my time at Euronet, the Asia-Pacific business presented unique opportunities, requiring legal support for double-digit growth across diverse markets in South East Asia and the Middle East in addition to India. To meet these demand, I worked to innovate our legal function along with leadership by establishing what I saw as a “quasi law firm” within the corporation, treating stakeholders as clients and legal team as service providers. We deliberately recruited attorneys with top-tier law firm experience from AZB, CAM and SAM who could maintain technical excellence of legal practice while developing commercial acumen and who had the necessary temperament and soft skills required to work in a fast paced multi-cultural international environment.
While Euronet was a NASDAQ listed US corporation operating in over 100 countries operating for nearly 30 years, I found that negotiating with technology giants such as Google, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft that were significantly larger and well-resourced required a dual perspective that included understanding not just contractual terms, commercial motivations and regulatory landscape but also strategic negotiation and cultivating perseverance. Collaborating with state owned enterprises, government bodies, DISCOMs, utility providers, SMEs and startups conversely required a different brand of lawyering.
Perhaps most rewarding was leading compliance and product counsel functions under the guidance of senior leadership. This involved direct and close interaction and engagement with regulators, LEAs, industry bodies and policy forums. The work often required pioneering approaches for fintech products with no established regulatory blueprint and involved constantly navigating regulatory grey zones with an informed view.
Ultimately, the transition taught me that exceptional in-house counsel must balance technical expertise with commercial pragmatism while maintaining integrity at all times.
What inspired you to establish your own practice, and what vision did you have for Frigg & Snotra? Were there any significant hurdles or obstacles you faced during the establishment of your practice, and how did you overcome them to build it into what it is today?
The inception of Frigg & Snotra emerged from a vision to create something fundamentally different in India’s legal services offering – a boutique practice that integrates legal expertise with strategic business advisory. Having worked both in prestigious law firms and as in-house counsel, I observed a persistent gap between pure legal advice and practical business implementation, particularly in technology, financial services, media, and emerging sectors. Our mission became building that crucial bridge between legal and commercial.
The name “Frigg & Snotra” was chosen from Norse mythology, symbolizing wisdom, foresight, and prudence – qualities we believed essential for modern legal practice. This foundation reflected our commitment to delivering counsel that looks beyond immediate legal questions to anticipate future challenges and opportunities.
Though we are only six months into this journey, the early stages have been both challenging and illuminating. As fundamentally a first-generation lawyer establishing an independent practice, the challenges were immediately apparent. The regulatory framework governing the legal profession in India places significant and legacy hurdles on marketing unlike other mature legal markets such as the United States of America – Bar rules prohibit lawyers from advertising or marketing services in ways that other professionals take for granted. This restriction made traditional client acquisition strategies impossible, requiring creativity in building reputation and visibility through relationship development.
Financial uncertainty was perhaps the most daunting aspect in the early months. Unlike established firms with predictable revenue streams, we faced the constant challenge of irregular payment cycles, with some clients delaying payments by 60-90 days or more. There is also the running risk of clients utilizing work product – detailed legal opinions or transaction documents – or taking them to other lawyers for execution without paying for the intellectual input. This has necessitated implementing a system of setting up advance payments and developing clear engagement terms that protect our interests while remaining client-friendly.
Building a client funnel without traditional marketing channels has demanded persistence and ingenuity from day one. We are focusing on creating specialized knowledge capital in emerging domains like fintech regulation, digital businesses, and cross-border transactions. This expertise-first approach is slowly but gradually attracting clients facing complex challenges that commodity legal services can’t adequately address.
Perhaps most challenging in these initial months has been establishing credibility as a new entity. We’re addressing this by adopting an agile, client-centric approach that emphasizes responsiveness and personalized attention that larger firms can’t match. This is beginning to build the trust that I hope will transform one-off engagements into lasting relationships.
We’re still at the beginning of our journey, with much growth ahead, but by remaining adaptable to evolving client needs while maintaining unwavering ethical standards, we’re working to transform these early challenges into the distinctive characteristics that will define our firm and practice in years to come.
Given your extensive experience in advising on complex IP license transactions, how do you foresee the future of intellectual property evolving in India, especially in the context of global transactions, and in light of emerging trends in AI and digital technologies?
India is at a critical crossroads vis-à-vis intellectual property (IP) as artificial intelligence (AI) and digital technologies reshape global businesses and transactions. As an advisor to technology companies for over a decade, I see several key developments in the near to mid-term future. India’s traditional IP framework anchored principally by the Patents Act, 1970 and the Copyright Act, 1957 was not designed for the AI era, creating significant gaps in protection, ownership and liability. The question of who owns AI-generated content remains particularly contentious and we are yet to see lasting judicial clarity on the subject (while several matters have already reached Indian courtrooms they are at no level of conclusion).
The Indian Patent office currently maintains that purely AI-generated inventions lack patentability. Considering the explosive growth in the use of AI for instance in life sciences, this approach is particularly concerning for AI-based IP inter alia in areas such as diagnostics, disease identification, drug and clinical trials where big data from healthcare providers, medical workers, hospitals, researchers and patients can be used to develop innovation, leaps and bounds quicker than using non-AI methods. A stable IP protection framework in this sector also has to be balanced with public access considerations. There is a general awareness over the critical role algorithms play in a data centric world. However algorithms and software currently face patentability challenges in India unless they demonstrate practical application within specified devices.
Harmonised IP protection is essential for cross border transactions. Even for emerging tech startups, a strong patent portfolio is one of the first items that provides investor surety that the company or team is working on a unique subject matter or value proposition. India may need to create entirely new IP mechanisms specifically designed for IP innovation – this is in line with recommendations of the parliamentary standing committee on commerce.
India has already done significant work on incentivizing startups to formally protect their IP and be an active participant in the patent ecosystem by creating fee exemptions or subsidies as well as providing for expedited processing times for startups as India prepares for an unparalleled wealth creation era. Some work still remains in bridging the legislative or judicial uncertainty in IP on emerging technologies. For businesses navigating this shifting landscape, I recommend ensuring robust contractual protections and safeguards for proprietary information and trade secrets, while parallelly monitoring policy developments. Corporations irrespective of scale may also actively engage (as industry stakeholders) with policymakers and legal experts to problem solve sector specific issues and concerns, with the ultimate goal of optimizing the emerging IP framework and striking a balance between clarity, protection and innovation.
Over the course of your distinguished career, what is one key lesson or insight that has stayed with you, and how has it shaped your professional journey? What advice would you give to younger professionals aspiring to build a career like yours, and what resources would you recommend for them to stay ahead of the curve in today’s fast-evolving legal landscape?
The most effective lawyers are those who position themselves at the intersection of legal expertise and business or commercial strategy. Legal counsel viewed in isolation rarely delivers optimal value. The ability to contextualize legal advice within commercial or existential realities facing clients transform regular counsel to indispensable advisor.
To borrow from Mr. Cyril Shroff, “Modern practice requires to be multilingual – fluent not just in law but in the language of business, technology and risk management”.
Another valuable habit is cultivating client empathy – the ability to genuinely understand your client’s motivations, constraints and unspoken concerns. This is a dimension of legal practice that cannot be automated or outsourced to artificial intelligence and remains the foundations on which exceptional legal careers are built historically, and will continue to be in the future.
If I was a younger legal professional I would embrace the technological transformation that is quickly reshaping legal practice. Tools such as lexum.ai, jurisphere.ai etc are simply the beginning. In terms of resources, I recommend looking beyond legal sources and engaging with trusted publications such as HBR, Mckinsey Quarterly and The Economist. For personal knowledge development, there is a wealth of knowledge based podcasts, and most podcasting platforms have great algorithms that guide self-discovery and often lead to deeper and meatier discussions. I find Business Wars by Wondery a great podcast to follow. Separately, I often use Google Scholar to read academic papers in emerging domains rather than an article and typically find more nuanced takes on issues. I use Notion to track my own learning and development.
The legal profession is known for its demanding nature, often making it difficult to maintain a work-life balance. As someone who has achieved great success in your field, how do you manage the pressures and responsibilities of your career while also prioritizing your personal well-being?
Me opining on work-life balance is like the Hindenberg calling someone a “hot mess”. The profession’s reputation for demanding schedules is well earned particularly in transactional practice where client emergencies and deal timelines often dictate rhythms and sleep cycles. However, lawyers maintaining work life balance isn’t an oxymoron like “affordable housing in Mumbai”. It just requires strategies slightly more sophisticated than explaining to your partner why a client call at 4 AM constitutes “quality time”.
Early in my career, looking at my seniors, I embraced the conventional wisdom that success required superhuman dedication – that sleep was optional and black coffee was a superfood. My “work life balance” consisted of consolidating closing documents while at a colleague’s wedding, hoping that I could catch his next one without a deliverable. I once found myself lugging a laptop up a mountain, choosing to carry it to review an SSPA offline instead of a camera tripod that I desperately needed to capture a view that I had trekked several hours to photograph.
My evolution towards sanity has involved several realizations: First, I have established my personal constitutional rights – non-negotiable elements that even the most demanding clients or matters cant amend. Every persons non-negotiables are different. For some it is morning exercise routines that are non-negotiable, for others it is playtime with their children or partners. A great irony I’ve noticed is that the most creative solutions to complex problems have emerged not during midnight office sessions but while watching terrible reality television or some other mundane activity constituting a break. Taking breaks actually improves critical thinking to the ire of legal purists.
The legal profession’s reverence for precedent shouldn’t extend to destructive work habits. Just because generations of lawyers before us sacrificed personal well-being on the altar of professional advancement doesn’t mean successive generations must continue this dubious tradition. Like typewriters and smoke filled cabins, some precedents deserve to be overruled.
The verdict? Balance isn’t perfectly achievable, but sanity is possible with boundaries, perspective, and the occasional ability to laugh at our profession’s most absurd demands.
You’ve mentioned that your interest in law developed through the process of eliminating other career options. Can you tell us more about how you eventually decided on law and how that decision has shaped your career trajectory?
I grew up in Kolkata during the 90’s and early 2000s, a time when the most sought-after career paths were typically in engineering, medicine, or accountancy. Coming from a family of engineers and doctors, I felt an innate urge to break away from this conventional path and carve out something different for myself. This led me to choose the Commerce stream for my XII standard examinations, leaving chartered accountancy as a potential option if I excelled academically.
Around this time, one of my school seniors was preparing for the National Law School entrance exams, and that sparked a deep interest in Law within me. As I explored this further, the idea of pursuing a legal career began to resonate more strongly. My decision solidified as I found myself thoroughly enjoying the CLAT syllabus, especially subjects like Logical Reasoning, Legal Reasoning, and Mathematics. With this growing passion, I pursued Law school admissions and successfully cleared the entrance exams for several institutions, including Government Law College (GLC), Mumbai.
I ultimately chose GLC, Mumbai, drawn by its distinguished alumni network and its proximity to the bustling legal landscape of the city. Reflecting on my school years, I realize I wasn’t always sure of my strengths, but my decision to pursue Law and Commerce led me to excel in both the legal and financial sectors. Today, with over a decade of experience as a lawyer, I find myself just as enthusiastic as I was during my first internship. A career in law has proven to be both dynamic and fulfilling, with each day bringing new challenges and learning opportunities.
You interned with prestigious law firms like Khaitan, JSA, and Nishith Desai, but after completing your education, you chose to start your career in the corporate world. What led to this decision, and how did transitioning from law firms to in-house legal roles shape your career path?
Law firms often hold strong appeal for law students, especially for those influenced by TV series like Suits. During my time in law school, I was determined to secure internships with top-tier law firms and was fortunate to have the opportunity to do so. Notably, my internship at Nishith Desai Associates (NDA) stood out for its culture of rigorous learning and research. Here, I honed my skills in meticulous drafting, meeting tight deadlines, and delving deeply into research to resolve complex problem statements. At that stage, starting my career at a law firm seemed like the most organic choice.
However, destiny had other plans, leading me to secure a placement with Kotak Mahindra Bank’s Corporate Legal Department in Mumbai. This shift made me realize the unique value of being an in-house counsel, where legal practice intersects with business strategy. In-house counsel roles offer the opportunity to develop a strong understanding of business dynamics, as your clients are internal stakeholders, and business acumen becomes integral to your work.
Over the years, I’ve transitioned through various roles in the Banking and Finance sector, as well as in e-commerce and Fintech, with each in-house position adding depth to my legal expertise. I thrive on the unpredictability and problem-solving challenges that come with in-house roles. As an in-house counsel, I am continually faced with a diverse legal issue—from product design and process development to policy framing, contract negotiations with key business partners, regulatory compliance, and handling employment matters. The role is deeply integrated with business operations at every level, making it both dynamic and fulfilling.
Being a first-generation lawyer, what were the key challenges you faced when you started your legal career, and how did you overcome those hurdles to establish yourself in such competitive sectors like fintech, e-commerce, and banking?
As a first-generation lawyer, I didn’t have the benefit of family precedents or insider guidance when navigating my career in law. I relied on my own judgment and intuition. However, I’ve been fortunate to have exceptional mentors who have generously offered their guidance throughout my career and are always just a phone call away.
One key difference between first-generation lawyers and those from legal legacies is the clarity of the path ahead. Those with a legal lineage often have a well-defined roadmap, while first-generation lawyers must thoughtfully and deliberately lay each brick to build their own path forward. While this process is deeply fulfilling, it can also mean missing out on opportunities due to a lack of exposure or knowledge.
From my journey, I would advise fellow first-generation lawyers to stay vigilant and open to opportunities and to actively seek out trusted mentors who can provide valuable guidance. The legal field is highly competitive, and success requires not only hard work but also being in the right place at the right time. Proactively expanding your network and knowledge base is crucial to thriving in this profession.
Having extensive experience dealing with regulators like the RBI and IRDAI, what are some key learnings you’ve gained from these interactions? How do these regulatory engagements influence legal strategies in fintech and NBFCs?
A crucial skill for lawyers working in regulated sectors is the ability to deeply understand the regulator’s perspective and intentions. It’s important to remain open to engaging with regulators and fostering a constructive dialogue. Often, it’s surprising how receptive regulators can be when approached with the right intent. Whether it’s for obtaining licenses or during annual audits, each interaction has given me invaluable insights into the rationale behind specific regulations and the purpose of certain prohibitions or compliance requirements.
A key lesson from these interactions is that regulators consistently expect transparency. Regulated entities must be willing to collaborate with the regulator to find business solutions that align with regulatory objectives. Understanding the regulator’s intent is particularly helpful when navigating ambiguous areas of regulation, allowing for more informed and strategic advice to internal business stakeholders, rather than simply interpreting the letter of the law.
For in-house lawyers, especially in regulated entities, the ability to offer compliant yet practical solutions is a highly sought-after skill. By bridging the gap between regulatory compliance and business needs, in-house counsel can play a critical role in helping organizations thrive within the bounds of the law.
In your experience negotiating complex contracts in fintech startups like Rupeek and larger organizations like Kotak & Flipkart, what do you see as the crucial aspects where an in-house lawyer can contribute to driving business success? How can legal counsel go beyond compliance to add strategic value?
My experience in different kinds of organizations has taught me that the role of an in-house counsel also changes based on the nature of the organization. In established organizations, departmental roles are well-defined, and each stakeholder plays a vital part in closing contracts. In contrast, within start-ups, the business often relies heavily on legal counsel, not just for legal and compliance advice but also for insights on structuring financial transactions and commercial terms.
Negotiating for established organizations often provides greater leverage when dealing with counterparties. However, representing a start-up has allowed me to engage deeply with the commercial and operational intricacies of contracts. Both experiences have been fulfilling in their way. For instance, while working for large Banks like Ujjivan & Kotak, I negotiated with Big Tech companies, gaining exposure to deals of significant scale. Similarly, during my tenure at Flipkart/Myntra, handling high-value celebrity contracts with intellectual property right implications showcased the complexity of working with major influencers. On the other hand, my work representing fintechs has allowed me to negotiate with larger banks and lending partners (perceived with higher negotiating power) to come to a consensus in commercial and regulatory structuring of deals.
Ultimately, when legal counsel provides comprehensive, well-thought-out advice that considers both legal and financial risks, they are no longer seen as obstacles but as essential partners in driving contract closure. This shift transforms the counsel’s role from a perceived barrier to a catalyst for success.
You cleared your CS professional exams in one shot while also pursuing law. What strategies or insights helped you manage both demanding courses simultaneously? Could you share some advice for young students who are pursuing multiple qualifications?
Both the Company Secretary (CS) and Law courses are highly demanding, given the vastness of their syllabi and the intensity of their exam schedules. However, I was determined to complete the CS course alongside law school. Opting to take all the modules of the CS professional course in one go was admittedly a bold decision — I sat for nine papers back-to-back, without a break. The enormity of the challenge made my resolve to stay determined and focused stronger. I don’t think I put any pressure on myself, but I just wanted to test my potential.
I devised a strategy to balance both fields of study. During the first half of the year, I concentrated on law school exams, while the latter half was dedicated to CS studies, though I maintained some focus on law for mid-term exams. Interestingly, much of the CS syllabus overlapped with legal concepts, which created a natural synergy in how I applied my understanding to both courses. What also helped me is the constant support and encouragement of my friends who were taking the exams with me. We often talk about team efforts in corporate life, student life also taught me the importance of a solid team in competitive exams. For students navigating similar challenges, my advice would be to prioritize and strategize — knowing when to focus on each subject is key. And most importantly, enjoy the learning process. Both law and CS test your understanding of core concepts, so cultivating a genuine interest in the material will ultimately lead to success.
With your wealth of experience in fintech, e-commerce, and banking, what advice would you offer to current law students and early-career professionals who aspire to work in these sectors?
A career in Fintech, e-commerce or any other regulated sector is very demanding, especially for lawyers because the regulatory landscape keeps changing. In my experience, you truly understand the essence and requirements of the regulations by reading it multiple times from different perspectives.
Developing a genuine interest in regulatory frameworks and their interaction with business offerings is fundamental for finding your footing as a lawyer in these sectors. For anyone looking to break into or transition into these industries, my advice is to invest time in understanding regulations, and their underlying purpose, and to cultivate business acumen around the various products in the space. This combination of legal expertise and business insight will make you a valuable asset in any organization.
As a mother, how have you managed to balance such a demanding career with your personal responsibilities? What advice would you give to others trying to navigate similar challenges?
I have always seen my mother as a role model who dedicated herself to her profession as a teacher all through her life while raising two children. Her resilience and dedication made it a natural choice for me to continue working after I had my baby. I was fortunate to have the support of a wonderful organization like Rupeek and an understanding manager, which allowed me to manage my professional responsibilities while being fully present for my daughter during her early years.
For mothers looking to maintain their professional careers, I recommend investing in quality child-care support if possible. Our role as mothers goes beyond simply managing a child’s daily routine—we are their source of inspiration and pride. I firmly believe that a child’s happiness is closely tied to their mother’s fulfilment. If you are passionate and happy in what you do, that joy will resonate with your child.
I am deeply passionate about my profession, and my daughter is a constant source of motivation, encouraging me to explore my full potential instead of setting limits. That said, balancing work and family life is always a dynamic process. It requires thoughtful decision-making and sometimes tough choices about when to prioritize what. But I believe that by staying true to ourselves and our passions, we set a powerful example for our children.
With such a demanding career in multiple sectors, how do you unwind and recharge? Are there any hobbies or activities that help you maintain a healthy work-life balance?
Weekends for me are completely dedicated to my home and family. As much as I enjoy staying at home and cleaning to my satisfaction, I also enjoy social gatherings. These days, I often find myself at gatherings with my daughter’s friends and their parents, enjoying the sense of community it brings. I also like to unwind by watching some thoughtful and reality-inspired series/movies. As a family, we also make it a point to plan small getaways or vacations whenever possible. These trips allow us to recharge, connect with nature, and explore historical places, creating lasting memories together.
Recently, my husband and I have embraced a healthier lifestyle. We’ve started making conscious choices for our well-being, and one of our favourite weekend routines is our Saturday morning workouts at Cubbon Park. It’s become a refreshing way to kick off the weekend, balancing physical wellness with the joy of being outdoors.
Can you tell us about the beginning of your career in law? What inspired you to pursue this field and how did you navigate the initial challenges?
I’d be happy to share. My interest in law began at a young age when I interacted with a corporate lawyer in Delhi during my civil services exam preparation. He told me that if you wanted to be recognised as a good corporate lawyer, then you must have a Company Secretary degree along with an LL.B degree from a reputed law college. After having this dual qualification you may advise businesses and become an essential part of running them, which intrigued me. Being a first-generation lawyer without much guidance was challenging, but my passion drove me forward.
I studied BA History (Hons.) and thereafter decision to pursue the law and Company Secretary course was unconnected to my domain however my passion and dedication made it easy for me. Additionally, I pursued a Company Secretary (CS) course, deepening my interest in corporate law and governance. Law school was both challenging and rewarding. I specialized in corporate law and was drawn to courses like mergers and acquisitions.
The steep learning curve and balancing work-life demands were significant challenges, but internships provided invaluable practical experience. My first significant step was an internship with a prestigious law firm, where I gained practical insights and faced the realities of the legal profession. Mentorship from senior colleagues was crucial, helping me develop my skills and confidence.
You have both a CS qualification and an LL.B degree. Was Company Secretary your first choice, or did you always plan to pursue law? How do you integrate the knowledge from both fields in your practice?
Initially, I pursued a Company Secretary (CS) qualification to gain a comprehensive understanding of corporate regulations and governance, which I knew would complement my legal education. Law has always been my primary passion, and the CS course deepened my interest in corporate law and governance.
Having both a CS qualification and an L.L.B degree has been incredibly beneficial in my practice. The CS qualification provides me with a solid foundation in corporate law, regulatory frameworks, company management, financial part of transaction and business aspects. It also enhances my ability to analyse financial statements and other relevant documents of a company. This knowledge is invaluable when advising business clients on legal matters related to corporate restructuring, as it allows me to understand and navigate the complexities of corporate law more effectively.
Integrating knowledge from both fields enables me to offer holistic advice to clients. For instance, when working on mergers and acquisitions, my legal expertise helps in drafting and negotiating contracts, while my CS background ensures that all regulatory, compliance, and financial aspects are thoroughly addressed. This dual perspective enhances my ability to provide comprehensive solutions, making me a more effective and versatile legal advisor.
How has your journey been from a Management Trainee at Ashiana Housing Limited to founding Corp Legex? What key experiences shaped your path?
My journey from a Management Trainee at Ashiana Housing Limited to founding Corp Legex has been both challenging and rewarding. At Ashiana Housing, I gained invaluable insights into the real estate industry and corporate law. This hands-on experience in managing compliance and corporate affairs was instrumental in shaping my understanding of the practical applications of law.
A pivotal experience during my training was working on a major merger matter. This exposure to complex regulatory and legal challenges significantly piqued my interest in corporate law and mergers. Additionally, I observed that many in-house counsels outsourced their legal needs to law firms, which sparked my interest in the potential of creating a firm that could offer integrated solutions.
The combination of these experiences solidified my desire to specialize further in corporate law and establish a firm like Corp Legex. My goal in founding Corp Legex was to offer comprehensive solutions that combine legal expertise with corporate governance insights, helping businesses navigate complex regulatory environments. Throughout this journey, mentorship from industry leaders and continuous learning has been crucial, reinforcing my commitment to providing strategic, client-focused services through Corp Legex.
With extensive experience in corporate restructuring, what do you believe are the most critical elements to consider during such processes to ensure a successful outcome?
Successful corporate restructuring hinges on several critical elements. First and foremost, a thorough understanding of the company’s current financial health and operational structure is essential. This involves conducting a detailed analysis of financial statements, cash flow, and market position to identify the core issues that need addressing.
Secondly, clear communication with all stakeholders is paramount. Ensuring that employees, shareholders, creditors, and other relevant parties are informed and engaged throughout the process helps maintain trust and support. Transparent communication also aids in managing expectations and mitigating resistance to change.
Legal compliance is another crucial factor. Restructuring often involves complex legal considerations, including regulatory approvals, contract renegotiations, and potential litigation risks. Ensuring all legal aspects are meticulously addressed minimizes potential obstacles and delays.
Lastly, having a strong leadership team to drive the restructuring process is critical. Effective leadership ensures that the restructuring efforts are aligned with the company’s long-term vision and strategic goals, fostering a successful and sustainable transformation.
Fintech is an evolving field with unique regulatory challenges. Can you share your experiences dealing with fintech companies and the specific legal issues they face?
Absolutely. Working with fintech companies has exposed me to a range of unique legal challenges that are intrinsic to the sector’s rapid innovation.
One significant legal issue is the structuring of complex financial transactions. For instance, I’ve been involved in drafting and negotiating agreements for new digital payment platforms and blockchain-based solutions. These transactions often require careful legal structuring to address the intricacies of new technologies and ensure that all parties’ rights and obligations are clearly defined.
Intellectual property is another critical area. Fintech companies often develop proprietary technologies or algorithms, making it essential to secure patents and protect trade secrets. I’ve worked on securing intellectual property rights for fintech innovations and handling disputes related to technology licensing and patent infringement.
Additionally, navigating contractual relationships between fintech companies and traditional financial institutions involves addressing unique legal concerns. Drafting clear, enforceable agreements that account for the innovative nature of fintech services is crucial.
Having started Corp Legex just five months ago, how are things progressing so far? What are some of the initial challenges you are encountering, and how are you addressing them?
Starting Corp Legex has been an exciting and challenging journey. The progress so far has been encouraging. We’ve been able to establish a solid client base and our team has been working diligently to deliver high-quality services. However, like any new venture, we are facing hiccups, but our collective energies are moving ahead day by day. Ensuring that we have the right team in place has been crucial. We’ve been actively recruiting talented professionals who share our vision and can contribute to our growth. Additionally, we’ve invested in training and development to ensure our team is equipped to handle complex client needs efficiently.
We’ve established robust processes for continuous learning and internal collaboration to stay ahead in these areas. Additionally, we leverage advanced technology to streamline our legal research and analysis, ensuring that we provide precise and informed guidance on our services offered to client. This approach allows us to offer comprehensive and strategic legal support tailored to our clients’ needs.
Overall, while there have been challenges, we’ve tackled them head-on with a proactive and strategic approach. The response from the market has been positive, and we are optimistic about the future as we continue to grow and refine our offerings.
You co-founded Unmukt Udaan, focusing on child education and development in rural areas. How has this initiative shaped your perspective on the importance of education and legal awareness in underserved communities?
I come from very humble background and understand how access to quality education can transform lives. Unmukt Udaan is an initiative to give shape to my belief and hope to spread education to all corners of the nation. It’s not just about academic learning but also about empowering individuals with the skills and confidence to pursue opportunities and advocate for their rights.
The Initiative has highlighted the critical role that legal awareness plays in these communities. Many families lack basic knowledge about their rights and the legal resources available to them. This gap often exacerbates their challenges and limits their ability to address issues like land rights, access to social benefits, and protection from exploitation.
Our efforts to integrate legal education into our programs have shown that when people understand their rights and legal frameworks, they are better equipped to make informed decisions and improve their circumstances. This experience has reinforced my belief in the intersection of education and legal awareness as fundamental tools for societal development and empowerment.
With your extensive experience, what advice would you give to young legal professionals who are just starting their careers? How can they develop a strategic and business-focused approach to law?
For young legal professionals, my advice is to cultivate a blend of technical expertise and strategic thinking. Start by mastering the fundamentals of the law and continually seek opportunities for practical experience. This will build a solid foundation and help you understand the nuances of various legal issues.
Simultaneously, develop a business mindset. Understand your client’’ industries, their strategic goals, and how legal decisions impact their business objectives. Engage in conversations with clients about their broader business challenges and look for ways to align your legal advice with their strategic needs.
Networking is crucial. Build relationships with mentors, colleagues, and industry professionals to gain diverse perspectives and insights. Stay updated on industry trends and regulatory changes, as these can significantly impact legal strategies.
Finally, embrace a problem-solving mindset. Approach each case or issue with a focus on finding effective and innovative solutions rather than just legal answers. This will help you become a valuable advisor and contribute to your client’’ success, thus enhancing your own career growth.
How do you balance your professional responsibilities with your personal interests and hobbies? What activities do you engage in outside of work to maintain this balance?
Balancing professional responsibilities with personal interests is crucial for maintaining overall well-being. I prioritize managing my time effectively by setting clear boundaries between work and personal life. This involves scheduling dedicated times for both work-related tasks and personal activities.
One of my key hobbies is cricket, which I find invaluable for maintaining balance. I try to play on a regular basis and stay physically active, it provides a mental break from work. Cricket helps me in recharging and improving my focus and productivity when I return to work.
In addition to sports, I make time for other personal interests such as reading and traveling. These activities offer me a change of scenery and a chance to unwind. Regularly disconnecting from work and pursuing these hobbies helps me stay refreshed and motivated, ultimately benefiting both my professional performance and personal satisfaction.
Having worked with both domestic and multinational companies, what differences do you observe in handling legal issues across different jurisdictions?
Working with domestic and multinational companies has revealed distinct differences in handling legal issues across jurisdictions. Domestically, the legal environment tends to be more predictable, with established regulations and a clear framework for compliance. This allows for more straightforward legal strategies and risk management.
In contrast, multinational operations introduce complexities due to varying legal systems, cultural norms, and regulatory requirements across countries. This necessitates a more nuanced approach to legal issues. For instance, navigating different regulatory frameworks requires careful coordination and understanding of each jurisdiction’s specific rules, which can impact compliance strategies and operational decisions.
Multinational companies also face challenges related to cross-border transactions, such as differing standards for data protection, intellectual property, and labor laws. Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive approach, often involving local legal experts and tailored strategies to ensure compliance and mitigate risks in each jurisdiction.
Overall, handling legal issues in a global context demands adaptability, thorough research, and effective coordination with local legal teams to address the diverse regulatory landscapes effectively.
