And pray tell what your solution to get them to comply is? I hate filling timesheets as much as the next associate, but I'm old enough to understand the role it plays in being able to bill (and overbill!!) clients on a timely basis. Folks who are complaining need to realize that they get paid when the firm realizes invoices and that only happens when timesheets are filled and billed out. I work at a Firm where no heed is paid to this by most Associates and only when the Firm took a hard stance of withholding amounts did some compliance come about. There are still those who are happy to work on a monthly basis at 80% of their salaries without wanting the balance 20% and hence it has now become a deduction rather than a withholding alone. That is finally getting some of the serial defaulters to start filling them weekly.

It was my first DD assignment. I was lodged in one of those premium hotels with a fully stocked minibar. A wonderfully bright idea of celebrating the fact that I had made it and had come of age was conceived. This was the night before the actual DD started. Went out and got myself euphorically buzzed. I tumbled back to my hotel room and polished off the entire minibar.
By the time I was done, my sanity was left far behind and the world around me felt like a pulsating beast. Soon this euphoria turned into a barf fest followed by the Great Blank. It was only on account of my extreme dehydration that I woke up only to find my cell phone dead and the clock ticking at midday.
Rushed to the data room with my senior emanating that disgust-filled death gaze. Could barely look at the document forget about taking notes. When I reached my hotel, a similar disgust-filled death gaze from the Manager and the housekeeping staff welcomed me. I had to pay around 25K towards the refurbishment cost/penalty before I was asked to vacate the premise on account of the sudden unavailability of any room at that point in time.
That 25K credit card debt along with the applicable interest was nursed by yours truly for another 4 months i.e., the time I took to find another job. I guess it's water under the bridge now and I seem to have fully recovered from that incident emotionally, however, as far as my CIBIL score is concerned, that perhaps is a story reserved for some different thread.

Educational institutes don't just run on fees. There are donations and govt funding. This is especially true of NLUs. Compare the fees of IITs, IISc or other govt colleges and they're fairly low. Those institutes at least require money for labs, research centres, equipment etc.
In an NLU, there's not much expenditure apart from infra (that too, only if you're looking to expand). In that context, it's actually baffling that they're asking for 15-20L in the first place. The reason fees are so high is probably just that students are willing to pay that much (if you're cracked an entrance exam heavily reliant on English, chances are you're from a decent family background).
Sure, it may be argued that law firms give decent packages and you're getting the money back in return (the IIM argument), but this is just assuming that people prefer taking a corp job. Having high fees discourages folks from pursuing academia or litigation (unless you come from a good background).

Sigh, I thought this was obvious and the people asserting 'judgement' as the spelling were trolling, but here we go then. Comment 11.1.1.A cites the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Constitution of India as evidence of ‘judgement’ instead of ‘judgment.’ Now, let me show how that is a blatant misrepresentation and lie. What does a court pronounce is a criminal case after hearing the parties? Let us read s. 235 CrPC together:
'235. Judgment of acquittal or conviction.—(1) After hearing arguments and points of law (if any), the Judge shall give a judgment in the case.' In cases tried summarily, s. 264 applies and it says '264. Judgment in cases tried summarily.—In every case tried summarily in which the accused does not plead guilty, the Magistrate shall record the substance of the evidence and a judgment containing a brief statement of the reasons for the finding.'

The 2006 CrPC plea bargaining amendments also use 'judgment', as in s. 265F, which says, '265F. Judgment of the Court.—The Court shall deliver its judgment in terms of section 265E in the open Court and the same shall be signed by the presiding officer of the Court.' Then, of course, there is the entire Chapter XXVII on judgments which exclusively uses the spelling 'judgment.' The CrPC does not once feature the 'judgement' spelling.

Okay, now the Constitution of India. #11.1.1.A specifically cites art. 374. What does it say? Let us read: ‘374. Provisions as to Judges of the Federal Court and proceedings pending in the Federal Court or before His Majesty in Council — (…) (2) [T]he judgments and orders of the Federal Court delivered or made before the commencement of this Constitution shall have the same force and effect as if they had been delivered or made by the Supreme Court.
(3) Nothing in this Constitution shall operate to invalidate the exercise of jurisdiction by His Majesty in Council to dispose of appeals and petitions from, or in respect of, any judgment (…).’

What is the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? The Constitution says ‘132. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in certain cases.—(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order of a High Court (…).’ Now, I will not reproduce each and every section here, but arts. 132-137 exclusively use ‘judgment’ and so does the entirety of the Constitution of India. Nowhere is ‘judgement’ used as commenter 11.1.1.A claims as (false) evidence.

Not enough evidence? I got you fam. The CPC exclusively uses 'judgment' (except for one s. 24 which was a 1976 amendment). What does the court pronounce after the case has been heard? Let us read s. 33 together, shall we?
'33. Judgment and decree.—The Court, after the case has been heard, shall pronounce judgment, and on such judgment a decree shall follow.'

Okay, but what does a foreign court, pronounce? A judgment, still. See ss. 13 and 14. The same spelling is used in the CPC Orders and Rules, e.g., OIR4, OXIIR6, OXIVR2.

The Oxford English dictionary, which is as definitive as it gets for the English language, mentions specifically that since the 19th century 'judgement' has become a common spelling, flipping the trend found in the 17th century where 'judgment' was prevalent. However, British legal contexts and American English continue to use 'judgment' as the spelling for court pronouncements. This is why 'judgement' means, well, 'ability to make considered decisions' and 'judgment' means 'A decision formally made in regard to a matter under consideration in a court of law' as per the OED.

I know many of you may not have paid subscriptions to the OED so as to get this information, so I have uploaded a screenshot of the entire page here, with highlights on the relevant portions: https://we.tl/t-QeNlrHI6Nf

So yes, I stand by my stance that 11.1 is dogshit, even more because of their reply in 11.1.1.A. I thought this would be obvious to people, but not only is that blatant misrepresentation a 'featured' comment but is also a highly upvoted one, not ‘contested.’ My comment is trollish and contested – way to go LI! TIL that ‘contested’ does not mean fact-check failed, because clearly the featured comment was not fact-checked, and I thought mine was so obvious I could presume this knowledge in a forum for lawyers.

According to the national sleep foundation https://www.sleepfoundation.org/how-sleep-works/how-much-sleep-do-we-really-need a human adult needs at least 7-9 to be considered functional. The amount of sleep required gets higher if you have a job that requires a high level of alertness.

Law is a job that requires such a level of alertness. In that sense, it is a job that requires an element of physical fitness to do. Mental fitness and this fitness is a function of a lot of things. You are only at your best if you are well rested and are able to engage in this evolution requires you to engage in. These things are like socialisation and taking care of your family/home life. These requirements are an evolutionary imperative.

This was one of the reasons the 8 hour work week emerged during the industrial revolution. A worker is more productive when well rested and that compensates for the worker to be unproductive for longer hours. Even then, you can justify longer hours if it is a job that does not require a high level of alertness or as law firms and the legal profession calls it "Attention to Detail" and "responsiveness".

But unfortunately law firms have not realised this. This is why the industry standard in India is mediocrity. Think about it. We are the largest common law nation in the world. Why is it that the world then turns to London and New York for their legal work? Why can't Indian law firms be that good that the Magic Circle competes with us? This is quite possible, for Indian law firms could just hire dual qualified advocates, practice foreign law here (as consultants, while being enrolled in India only) and have formal counsel in local jurisdiction sign off on their work/opinions. Heck, dual qualified Indian lawyers could be globe-trotting counsel working out of Fort, Bombay instead of trying to show off getting conference room access at some foreign chamber on LinkedIn.

Its time we realised, that if we are working on 3 hours of sleep, our work is bound to be terrible. Mistakes will happen. Slip ups will happen. This will make a bunch of already sleep deprived people very angry. They will then shout at people. People will get yelled at. The culture will turn toxic.

Indian legal employers need to realise that there is no point just having an enrolled person sitting in a chair. To have them perform at their best they need to have rest and leisure time. This has to be a non-negotiable. Indian firms need to fight overwork if they want to grow. If people aren't taking breaks, force them to. Have mandatory recreation leaves. (Audit firms already do that). Keep them mentally engaged in what is going on. Otherwise they just can't give their best.

So if you're screwing up, it really is not your fault. The people who manage your workplace, they need to get their act together to ensure you have a climate in which to thrive. It is in their interest. Quality builds loyalty both among your employees and clientele. Young firms and lawyers need to fight overwork by competing on quality rather than quantity. Overwork is an enemy. A sleep deprived lawyer who can't focus is useless to everyone.

Just a rant.

Now that you've been shown to be incorrect, you resort to foul language. Wow.

In any case, if your point is to refer to the orders from courts to decide what the correct spelling should be (what an absurd methodology!), you may also find usage of the word "judgement" in:

Code of Criminal Procedure
Constitution (Art. 374)

The words "judgment" and "judgement" interchangably in:

Delhi High Court Rules Chapter 11 - https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/writereaddata/upload/CourtRules/CourtRuleFile_AF9J1IE4.PDF
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Sunil J. Kinariwala (Supreme Court) - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/952721/
Ge Capital Transportation vs Rahisuddin Khan (Del HC) - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1987479/
R.K. Aggarwal And Others vs State Of Haryana (P&H HC) - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/145651945/

Simply search for "judgement" on SCC and several thousand results come up.

It's just pathetic what anonymity allows people like you to do - resort to absolutely disgusting method of discourse while not even being correct.

Hi. I am currently a 4th year at a T1 NLU, and I have multiple Rs & Fs on my transcript. Regardless, I have not only gotten multiple T1 internships, but have also lined up two assessments for winters from my work therein.

So a short answer to your question is: Yes, you will still be able to get all of that.

As a general tip, just try to make up for the grades in other ways: publications, moots, other competitions etc. Make your CV such that anyone who looks beyond your grades to other headings simply has to get impressed.

And then, assuming that you're in NLS/NALSAR/NUJS, push your student internship committee to get more firms, especially in your preferred practice areas. You'll be surprised as to how easy it is get T2 internships, at firms that pay more than 10L and such, if their known practice areas are either niche or considered complicated by most.

For instance, LKS & ELP for tax law, ICUL & Lexygen for funds, Anand & Anand for media law, Keystone & P&A for arbitration etc. are very well-regarded and pay decently — but will most often be overlooked by most people in T1s. Start your internships at places like these. Build your CV, and then branch out.

As for placements, rest assured. I've seen people getting their degrees in 6 years and still ending at Trilegal/Luthra/Indus etc. One mere subject repeat would hardly make any difference, if the rest of your CV shows that you'd be able to work in whatever area you're going for.

None of this is supposed to suggest that you need not work hard. This is merely to inform you that you very much have a good shot at everything you want, regardless.
All the best!

Latest update on the consequences . "NALSAR exodus: 8 faculty resign in one semester in Hyderabad"

Read more at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/94773673.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

It's a whole lot of nothing, most foreign law firms have a country specific "desk", Dentons now has a law firm instead. Dentons will be dispensing no advice, it'll be Link Legal lawyers, so nothing changes there. If they start paying Dentons scale salaries, then it's a matter of interest otherwise it's just a puff piece.

https://www.dentons.com/en/about-dentons/news-events-and-awards/news/2022/october/dentons-announces-an-historic-combination-with-link-legal-in-india

https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/dentons-combine-with-indian-law-firm-link-legal-2022-10-11/

Quote:

Dentons on Monday said it is launching a combination with Indian law firm Link Legal, giving the global law firm a domestic foothold in India's large but historically isolated legal market.

The combination will add 130 lawyers in Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai and Hyderabad to Dentons' vast legal franchise, while allowing Link Legal to tap into Dentons' platform of more than 20,000 professionals in 80-plus countries.

Is this allowed?

You need to know very little tax to be able to answer most questions which people will have around investment funds.

Read the representative assessee concept under S. 161 - 164 (or thereabouts) and the concept of determinate and indeterminate status of trusts. Then why that doesn't apply to Cat I and Cat II AIFs under Section 115UB - which gives them a pass through on their investment income. There are a couple of circulars around this which came out a few years ago (I want to say 2014/5 but could be wrong). Cat III AIFs are still impacted by Sec 164 representative assessee issue and thus they don't make much sense in India. Maybe also read the AIG AAR ruling on determinate trusts and the circulars which explicitly refused to follow that ruling.

To round this off, read the fairly recent judgement on application of GST on carry (ICICI Econet) and some commentary on why people disagree with it. I'm yet to read this one myself.

I've never checked the sections which impact REITs and InVITs but I'm sure you can get a good understanding in less than half a day.

I'm neither a funds nor a tax lawyer, so you can see how simple it is. Just don't let anyone feed this into your head that tax is hard or difficult to understand.

How confidently incorrect.

"Judgement" and "judgment" are both accepted spellings.

[quote]Judgment can also be spelled judgement, and usage experts have long disagreed over which spelling is the preferred one. Henry Fowler asserted that "the OED [Oxford English Dictionary] prefers the older & more reasonable spelling. Judgement is therefore here recommended…." William Safire held an opposite opinion, writing, "My judgment is that Fowler is not to be followed on his spelling of judgement." Judgement is in fact the older spelling, but it dropped from favor and for centuries judgment was the only spelling to appear in dictionaries. That changed when the OED (Fowler's source) was published showing judgement as an equal variant. Today, judgment is more popular in the U.S., whereas both spellings make a good showing in Britain.[/quote]
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judgment

All you had to do was a simple Google search buddy.

Asking commentators whether their claims lack factual evidence is actually part of the moderator's job description. It is not as if both the sides are lacking such evidence yet the moderator is only asking one side to be out with it. Moreover, discussion includes answering questions asked as part of the discussion, and not merely monologuing rants. What I do have a problem with is the moderator's open declaration of personal stance using the website handle. If they need to declare that, then they should comment using their own name or an alias like others do.

1. No. The evidence of the prosecution shows that. If the defence had something to establish like that, they ought to have led defence evidence. From the material on record, the answer is a no.

2. WhatsApp chats corroborate the testimony of the prosecutrix. They show the kind of relationship that existed between the main convict and the prosecutrix. They also show the multiple blackmail attempts. Messages literally saying I will ruin your life, buy a sex toy, send me photos right now or there will be consequences ("hungama").

The coercion is very well shown, especially when considered in light of the testimony of the prosecutrix (let us not pretend that the WhatsApp chats are the only evidence. An entire trial was held with the top lawyers involved. Had something substantial come out in the cross-examination, that would had been raised before the HC as well. Rather, the lawyers use Tukaram (lol) to say consent ki definition hi galat hai.

3. Where is it even coming from? The HC gave Vikas Garg the benefit of doubt, it does not mean that the prosecutrix's version is false or unbelievable. He got the benefit of doubt because the WhatsApp chats are insufficient to corroborate the parts of his involvement. So due to lack of corroborative evidence, he has been let off. Not because of utter lack of evidence. Not because the court believes he was falsely implicated. But only because the court did not want to convict him based solely on the victim's testimony (which, too, is legally permissible btw).

Where do you even come to "vengeance"? From which part of the judgement - or any other material - do you gather that any of this was for vengeance?

I know most of you here are law students and are taught to question everything, think critically, et al. But ffs, apply the critical thinking properly, and not just for the sake of it. Read the judgement, see the chats, see the arguments. All you appear to have done is raise questions to doubt the judgement without any basis. Zabardasti ka devil's advocate only to cause victim blaming.

I'm a tax professional with more than 20 years of experience working in major firms, not a law student. If you've good names to add, add it here instead of making such blanket comments. Datar's name is there because he's one of the best, who does lot of tax. Does Salve or Rohatgi do tax, yes of course. But a miniscule part of their practice is tax. OP wants tax focused lawyer, which others aren't. In SC, you still have guys like S Ganesh but he doesn't do much tax. Zohaib hasn't done much IDT. Same as the others in Mumbai bar like Percy etc. Bharat R in Bombay is still upcoming guy. Tarun Gulati in Delhi is still more of HC guy. Similarly, can give comments for many. But these are guys to look for.

You're trying to count your chicken before they hatch. You'll see for yourself what the learning experience will be like.

Most senior counsel will focus on high court work, while the skills needed to be a criminal defense litigator will be best acquired in the trial court. You have many more years and internships to go. Good luck!

All North Indian languages are derived from Proto European languages. Sure, Hindi has the sway in a large part of the country, but it is a language that is based on Sanskrit which was based on the language spoken by Central Asian people or Aryans (depending on which theory you believe) who came and settled in India. English is spoken in India because of the English invasion. But English is also an official language and we have made it our own. Even the formal English that we use is peppered with Indianisms. I dare you to find the word 'prepone' in the King's English. So rather than seeing this as a relic of Britain, I think we are now colonizing English. It gives us advantages in making us more employable, allowing global trade more easily and in making us more attractive for investments from across the world. It is our soft power and I see no good reason to give up soft power for linguistic chauvinism. If we want to be truly Indian, why not speak Tamil since it is India's oldest language and the ancestors of Tamil speakers were possibly the original inhabitants of India? I have no bias towards them because I am somewhat North-ish but logic would demand that.

As for the law, having laws in English makes it easier for practitioners from across the country to practice the law. Why would you want to add a stumbling block to people from one region to practice the law that is applicable to all?

First of all congratulations for clearing the exams alongside having a hectic job

Certainly go for it, BDO is a very prestigious post especially if you live in North India, the avenues of promotions are also very good you will be elevated to All India Services after a decade of Service.

No one gives two sh*ts about Corporate Lawyers outside the Corp Law circle.

The prestige and connections which you recieve after joining the service is unparalleled.

You can always quit if you don't like it.

the two years training contract is now rechristened as qualifying work experience (QWE), although one can gain QWE at anytime after the graduate degree, all magic circle firms have taken the decision that they will provide a maintenance grant + SQE prep fees + SQE exam fees to their trainees while they pass the SQE and only then allow QWE.
Depending on the law firm and the prep provided the SQE needs to be competed between 30-40 weeks. Not 20 months.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on 28th July, 2022
Pronounced on 30th September, 2022
CRA-D-653-DB-2017 (O&M)
Karan ....Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CRA-D-662-DB-2017 (O&M)
Hardik ....Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CRA-S-2396-SB-2017 (O&M)
Vikas Garg ....Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CRR-3142-SB-2017 (O&M)
X ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

Hello, I’m a 2nd year here at NLUJ
My father, the sole breadwinner of the family passed away last week. It is now me, my mother & two younger sisters. Up until this point, he was paying for my college but after his passing, we are left with no steady source of income. Accordingly, we are considering an education loan.
I’ve had until this juncture rather limited interaction with banks. I have an account in SBI and from what I’m aware, can get a loan up to 20 lakhs without a tangible collateral security. Further, SBI provides 0.50% concession on the interest rates to girl students, so there’s that.
Can anyone kindly simplify the nitty gritties of the process? Explain how exactly does floating interest rate works? I would be immensely indebted if someone can take time off and provide an example, hypothetical or personal of the process and the repayment, just a gist would suffice.
I haven’t confided this news to anyone at college as I personally need more time to collect myself but I plan on confiding to a professor soon.
I’m also exploring other avenues to finance my education which I feel professor(s) can guide me better to but not withstanding that, I would be beyond grateful to have my question w.r.t education loan answered.
Thankyou.

I like my jobs. Many people like their jobs. But I went into it with both eyes open knowing what to expect. I approach each day eager to learn new things and have now gained enough credibility among clients and colleagues to be considered somewhat of an expert at what I do. I generally think my colleagues are okay people doing their best- if somewhat selfish. But that’s okay. You don’t get everything in life and that’s that.

Don't move now. I guess u were made SA ahead of the typical four year time frame in your firm. You should move when you are 3 year 10 months (join the Tier 1 firm then) and ask for batch parity. That's your optimal case scenario.

No chance they are going to give you SA when your batch people who are home grown are stil A3.

In my limited experience, it is possible that they may hire you as an A3 and promote you post probation or in the next cycle basis evaluation. It will depend on various other factors but it is a sad reality that they will try to discount some of your experience as it was not in a T1. Negotiation is key here. if you have good grasp on the subject and are making the move in a same practice area please negotiate hard for SA or atleast SA promotion post probation.

P&A despite all its criticisms does have a solid top heavy competition team with SD and SG leading it. Further the freshers are thrown right into complicated matters so that kind of exposure is great and most other firms don't give such opportunities.
At the same time - growth stagnates after a certain level/years of work and the work environment can be very toxic. Therefore the attrition rate is extremely high.
I would still recommend freshers right out of college to give it a shot since you will be made to work on matters of substance in the first few days of joining itself

My first DD at a tier 1 firm. I did not review the miscellaneous clause of a sale agreement. Just before DD report was to be issued, i read that sale deed again to realize it has a ROFO clause in miscellaneous section. Told my SA who thrashed me, but did not highlight to the partner that i made this mistake.

Got the firm fired. I left/resigned. Partner somehow got the client back saying I have been fired. Called the client and told him I left on my own and that the Partner would never fire me. Joined a litigation senior afterwards. Now running my own business. Sometimes I struggle to make ends meet. But that's life. Take it head on as it comes. Have fun and brag about it. As far as I remember, the client seemed impressed when I told him that.

They pay relatively well — 12+2 after your trainee period - and have a decent reputation. However, their work culture is known to be extremely toxic — in the past two years, a huge chunk of their lawyers have left — from A1s to PAs. If that wasn't enough, their biggest client was Amazon, which they're on the verge of losing post their colossal mess in the gun jumping case. Apart from that, they primarily work on pointless abuse of dominance allegations in FMCG markets and handle relatively easier merger regulation matters.

As someone who's worked with the team in the past, I can testify as to both — SG's legal brilliance, as well as his tendency of pushing the hardest deadlines on to you. As such, to some, all of the above may be tolerable because of the learning you get; but in the eyes of a good number of people who left, the stress, work-hours and micromanagement was not deemed workable.

At the end of the day, it will be your choice, and I'm assuming that bigger and more famous competition law firms - S/CAM, Trilegal etc - are not available to you. However, if you have any other more famous opportunities w competition law, you should take it.

The Indian legal system and legal education system is crying out for reform and we have him in charge since Manmohan Singh’s time! He conveniently switched parties. He has broken Ram Jethmalani’s record as the longest serving Chairman. Ram Jet set up NLSIU while this man has set up some dodgy institutions at KIIT Odisha and in Goa.

What’s going on?? Can’t the BJP appoint someone good?

P.S. Expecting featured and pinned status and Manan and Kian are such good friends 😀

The first step is to get yourself into a Law Officers chamber or that of a political senior. Unless you are a son or daughter of an MP or MLA in which case you can get onto a State or Central Panel.
There are 2 shining examples:
Arijit Prasad who is now a Senior in the Supreme Court has spent his entire career from 2001 on the Central Govt panel. He did Income Tax cases exclusively and it gave him a lot of visibility. This happened because his father was a Congress MP from Assam, but he built up relations on his own which ensured he continued under the BJP.
Zohaib Husain also has spent 15 years on the Government panel after joining Mohan Parasaran when he was SG. He continued into the BJP regime and has been a briefing counsel in many cases before being made ED and Tax standing counsel for Central Govt before the Delhi High Court.
Both of them have made the choice not to have private practise (very few private briefs come the way of someone who has spent all their time on Govt panels). Now the trajectory would be towards judgeship, ASG, etc.
Remember however that if you choose this path, there isn't much money in it (unless you choose less scrupulous avenues).

Hello Dear Associate,

P.S: Hadn't Amex stopped taking on new customers a few years back?

I would strongly advise you to hustle more and aim for the HDFC Infinia Card, which has more privileges in India.

Till then, aim for 2 cards - 1. Axis Bank-Vistara (F+B plus Airmiles and the Vistara benefits) and 2. SBICap Gold (for general kharche)

Amex Platinum is reasonable (I used to have it before they offered me the Centurion) but not for those who spend most of their time in India, as it is not widely accepted (unless you spend half of your time in SoBo or play golf half of the day on weekends like me - then go for it). The sole benefits that I liked were the Vistara 2-hour prior change facility, and the 50% suite discount at Oberoi (p.s: Associates ke liye suite book hona mushkil hai and 2-hour prior change ka kya hi faida unless you're a Partner). Vistara pe overall 15% off is also okay, but service fee aur surge karke baat ghoom phir ke aas paas aajati hai. Plus, when you're living a busy life, you really can't choose your flights on the basis of airline preference.

Outside India, the benefits are much better, and the benefits are actually realised.

For now, try to grab some outstation visits on the Law Firm's bill and master the Hotel Points (Taj, Oberoi, Accor, Hilton, or Marriott - pick a group and stay loyal) + Airmiles (join Vistara for Domestic ofc, KLM/Flying Blue for SkyTeam, United Airlines for Star Alliance - avoid unallied carriers like Spicejet, Akasa, TruJet, GoFirst, and ofc Indigo) and always look at small schemes with your card or airline and hotel group membership (for e.g. Kiehl's + Vistara collab).

All of the aforementioned advice is with the presumption that you have at least 18L post-tax and post-investment (stonks, FDs, and whatever you call it) disposable income if married and 12L if unmarried live in Bombay or Delhi.

Cheers.

It’s the Client who pays. So it depends on the mandate you have. Usually partners get Business Class travel and Associates get economy for domestic travel but the hotels are the same for both Partners and Associates. Usually a Taj/ Oberoi/ Marriott/ equivalent in a given city. All foreign travel is business class at the Client’s expense.

Speaking from a Max Towers based law firm.

My parents had this card for a couple of years before they gave it up. Yes, on paper you get a lot of benefits that set-off and even exceed the annual fee, but the question is:
1. How often will you be able to avail these benefits
2. What are these benefits worth to you

Cool, you get vouchers for Taj/Marriott whatever their new partnership is. This is the main thing that is supposed to set-off the annual fee. Everything else is frivolous math just for marketing purposes. We may have had the Plat Charge, but we are distinctly upper middle class. We are content with a Treebo/Radisson Blu. We don't need a Taj/Marriott. So it was an issue of diminishing marginal utility: sure, nice benefit which is supposedly monetarily worth 45K, but that 45K itself is not worth it to us.

The only reason one should even consider Amex is because of their customer service, it truly is unparalleled. There are cheaper cards with similar benefits, but it takes so much effort to avail those benefits. The concierge service definitely works and Amex Plat concierge is the best one there is. But again, the point is, how often will you use it? It came in handy once when we had to travel at like an hour's notice and didn't have time to book the tickets ourselves but for the most part it's just a superfluous luxury, esp since in India, you can't even just tell them what to do and then disconnect. You need to stay on the line because no transactions can be made without the OTP.

I am working in the M&A team of a tier I law firm in Mumbai and I have been recently diagnosed with ADHD (had a proper clinical evaluation from a psychiatrist). For a long time my understanding has been that maybe I am in a bad team and the people don't really understand how hard I work and they just criticize me for small things and so I changed teams and law firms a couple of times and realized that some issues were just constant for me and that made me realize that it can't always be the team, it's probably just me.

Things like time management and meeting deadlines are so difficult and then reading so many documents become so exhausting. Taking/following instructions like the way partners and seniors give instructions in law firms is difficult for me to catch and follow and as a result I often end up doing things incorrectly. The motivation to start working is never there and even when I know it's a simple thing which I can finish on time, I leave it for later because I don't have the energy/motivation to start it.

It's not like I am not trying, I know I work very hard and I try to do things correctly to the best of my ability. I know I take longer to get work done so I put in extra late nights so that I am on time with my work. But no matter what I do, I am unable to do things correctly and seniors are always telling me how my work is not perfect and how that's not acceptable. And I like the work so it can't be because I have no interest in the work I do. Unfortunately, because of another underlying medical issue, I can't take certain medication including some usually used for ADHD.

These things in school and college had no major consequences but in law firms these issues have consequences and before I know it, I will become that associate who is bad with work and have a reputation. I am always anxious and stressed and that has it's own impact on health.

I found this thread recently and I understand there are corporate lawyers here who have lived through this and I want to seek some guidance with regards to what I should do and what alternatives I may have here? Would really appreciate some help as I am really struggling.

So your doubts seems to stem from the idea that your basic legal awareness is lacking and litigation would remedy that. I'll break down what you said into points for my reference and for simplicity's sake:

1. You don't wanna do litigation for so and so reason i.e, bullshit - Completely fair. You'll always encounter a ton of shit in this profession and its not for everyone. Like, you need to be patient to succeed and really grind your whole life to even be decent at it.

2. You lack awareness of basic legal information and you think an internship in litigation would have/could have remedied that, at least partly if not completely - Okay so this question can be answered in two parts:
a. Firstly, your doubts. The CPC is the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. It governs civil procedure. Its a procedural law that oversees the functioning of legal bodies that deal with civil law, where disputes are related personal injuries between parties, i.e., civil wrongs. Its not the CrPC, which is the code of criminal procedure, 1973 which oversees criminal procedure for offences. Court Fees is the amount of money you're paying the court for your suit. You make a suit (various kinds of suits such as plaints, petitions, appeals, miscellaneous suits etc) and for filing and admitting your suit, you pay a fee. Your suit will have something called a prayer, which is what you're asking as relief for the suit. You calculate a certain percentage of the sum you're claiming and pay the court. In some courts, the fee will be fixed and you dont have to make that calculation. For Example, court fee for a district consumer case where you're claiming compensation over 10 lakhs is Rs. 800. Simple concept right?
Moving on, stamps are documents that you affix with certain documents such as applications or agreements that authenticate the agreement. It means the agreement has some sort of binding effect over it and can be used as evidence of authenticity before a court. It is needed in several situations such as filing applications and authenticating agreements, such as lease and rental agreements. This question is quite broad and the Stamp Act has several layers to it. In fact, its not required for an average citizen to know when a stamp is required for each and every situation. Its helpful in common situations such as authenticating your rental agreement, but the Act has fairly complex aspects to it. In situations like those, I think its best to consult a lawyer.
Regarding registering a house, don't worry, I believe in you. You can most definitely register a house as a matter of right and ability. But in all seriousness, registering a house also has several layers to it and you aren't going to learn that from a three month internship. Why? Because its contextual. If you were to make a simple sale, where you're going to purchase a house, then the process would be simpler and you can have your sale deed ready with your aforementioned stamp, knowledge you had because of your awareness of the Stamp Act. But, there's more to buying a house than just signing a sale deed. Buying plots of land, getting sanctions on them from your local civic amenities board, your sewage and water supply board, your electricity board, obtaining sanctioned plans, getting materials and everything, signing off on your architect and so many other layers to that process of building a house, all of which you are definitely not going to learn in an internship. You're gonna need a lawyer for that.
Regarding street smarts, being a lawyer can help yeah, but not an intern. I imagine a large number of firms/chambers aren't going to send interns to handle with police officers, gladhandle them, explain the situation of their case and have an FIR registered and deal with criminals during their summons and production in a witness box along with cops and bribe them and all that right? Even for regular situations, like speeding fines, your street smarts are dependent on experience, and being a lawyer isn't the only way or even the only right way to do it. Relax, cops are normal most of the time too. You can deal with them just like any other person. There are of course, belligerent cops, but being a lawyer may only give you some methods of dealing with the situation. Doesn't mean you can't deal with it.

b. Secondly, whether an internship would change any of the situations above: Yes, if your doing it in the relevant fields that cater to your desire for awareness in the legal profession. Civil and crim trial lawyers do this shit daily dude, but as an intern, your learning will be restricted to minimal responsibilities. Its not going to be the same as an associate, and you won't learn to be an expert in two-three months even if the internship is as intense as being an associate in a small and overburdened chambers. It takes ages to develop a skillset required to handle situations like this with ease. Even though you may learn the basics, it'll also be restricted to just experiences you have with the Chambers. It won't prepare you for adulthood. Just chill and go with the motion and you'll experience all this anyway. Worst case, you just call a lawyer.

3. As a lawyer, you need to understand that the expectation that you're going to be this all-knowing street smart savvy dude who has connections to the underworld is just a societal concept. You have no reason to feel inadequate about not doing things like this. They are not simple or minor legal affairs and require people with experience to handle these affairs smoothly. You don't have to feel inadequate because this is the path you chose not to take and you've decided to specialize in something else as a lawyer that someone in litigation probably has 0 idea about. You don't need to know everything. Its like being a mechanical engineer and feeling bad because you don't know how to code. A lot of the things you're going through can just be solved by living every day and going through the motions. They don't need to be fast tracked by doing a litigation internship.

Don't worry about it and relax, all these basic legal stuffs you don't have to know beforehand and you don't need to do a litigation internship to keep abreast with them.

empanelment in itself is not SO difficult - you meet a few seniors, you make a few requests to the right people, your name gets put in. empanelment happens en masse, or notifications are issued even for few (at times, one single advocate) at a time. bt the actual marking of matters after being empanelled - that's the real game and that's where the mighty and the influential take the cream of the work

On the date of the pronouncement, the judge merely reads the operational portion of the judgement and signs it. The appearance on the day the order was reserved is the appearance that is recorded on the judgement.

While seeing your name on the order sheet is a thrill, as others have pointed out, you aren't missing out on much. You'll be appearing in plenty of final hearing matters.

Think of SQE as the UK's version of the bar exam. Its a two part exam.

Any graduate (even non-law) from anywhere in the world can give SQE. However, as the questions are on UK law, having a common law degree closely aligned with the UK system is always helpful. There are excellent prep materials available like https://www.law.ac.uk/study/postgraduate/law/llm-sqe-1-and-2/

to enrol as a solicitor in the UK a foreign qualified lawyer will need at least 2 years of experience apart from passing the SQE, foreign legal experience can be transferred, also if someone has a lot of experience they can also seek exemptions from some of the SQE exams. However, it is always difficult and you would have to show a lot in the portfolio etc.

If you are interested have a chat with the prep providers they will be able to guide you more about the sqe.

All good options. Jimmy Bhoy is a tad bit on the expensive side and I'm not sure why Starbucks is in this distinguished line-up. Kalaghoda Cafe is much better and at the same price point. The gomantak restaurants can also be included if you're looking for sea good (Mahesh Lunch Home and the others).

A special mention must be made for Deluxe; while not in Kalaghoda, they deliver to Kalaghoda and they are both cheap and delicious (if a little unhygienic).

If OP cannot find a reasonably priced good food option in Fort then OP will not be able to find a decent place to eat in Mumbai. Fort is literally the simplest place to find good cheap food - there is one place literally stone's throw away.

When I moved offices from Fort, the eateries were one of the (among many) disappointments of Lower Parel.

So, you gots to buy a used PS4 PRO - INR 20-24. Buy a 43 inch TV. INR 26K.
Buy an office laptop - INR 50-60K

Total = INR Max INR 1.2 lakhs.

1.2 lakh gaming laptop will be problematic for you. It will make working on the device look like a chore because your mind associates laptop with pleasure.

Don't mix the two to keep your productivity high.

Plus a 43 inch screen for gaming on a console is nothing like it. Now GPU power per rupee value for money comes from console gaming, not from PC.

You won't regret it.

Cafe Milan - Tawa Pulao. Puri Bhaji while you taking a quick xerox of the Affidavit to be served on the other side;
Cafe Military - Kangaroo Beer, Pallonji, kheema pao, mutton cutlet, salli boti, typical irani fare,
Yazadani Bakery - Bun and Brun Maska, Khari and their Irani chai.
Jimmy Boy - Opp. CB for their burgers and Dhansak(essentially Parsi food).
Ripon Club - Exclusive Parsi gentleman's club. If you can sneak in through with a Parsi.
the ubiquitous Udupi Restaurants are hard to miss - Dwarka, Poornima( for the lunch south Indian thali) etc.
Starbucks at Horniman Circle for the Free WIFI and urgent client meetings- nobody will bat an eyelid if you conduct your conference by not ordering their overpriced,overrated coffee and just walk out after the 'deed'.
Fountain Sizzlers- Opposite HC if you have a fairly fat wallet and are in the mood to splurge. Their Sizzlers, Caesar Salad and other continental fare et al.
Hotel Fountain - For their scrumptious Manglorean Food
Cafe Brittania, Ballard Estate for their Excellent Chicken/Mutton Berry Pulao albeit expensive - Lawyers at JSA, DRT/DRAT and the erstwhile CLB can relate to this.

In a nutshell, you have fare for your wallet as well as palate. Bumping into a Kala coat is guaranteed at this places.

There's more including the quintessential drinking holes for lawyers, but it seems the OP's question was limited to food. Can add on public demand.

It's Delhi High Court.

I didnt mean that I'll give my appearance separately.

Let me rephrase my query:

1. Suppose judgment got reserved today. Advocates appearing for both parties must have given their appearance.

2. Judgment pronouncement date is 31.10.2022. The Advocates from both side will be present there. Can I alongwith them give appearance?

I mean. Rubbish no. Even back in the day folks didn’t just study from a textbook. They read cases in physical AIRs and CD Rom SCC and inter library loans. And as someone who has taught this current lot. They’re not good at technology. They’re good at apps on their phone where they can consume content. Ask them to do something even a little complex on MS office and they don’t know how. Many of my students don’t know how to save documents. I am not kidding. I have had students struggle to turn in assignments cause they couldn’t save the document.
They also don’t understand Boolean search and the limitations of Manu and scc as search engines. They don’t know how to find information if an algorithm doesn’t feed it to them. They do know a lot about Instagram and tik tok and all that stuff- but no use.

I think in the earlier years when law schools were an unproven brand students had more of a competitive streak and felt they had more to prove. Now it’s a little resting on laurels. Most of my students don’t really want to be here, they have no great love for the law or anything else- they just heard that a degree from law school gives them a job. Which it may or may not, but they think they’re paying for the degree and not the education. I teach for the exceptions.

Can you please tell me where are the meaning of the terms like ROFO, ROFR, tag along, drag along, CP, CS, Closing, Anti dilution, liquidation event, floor price, AVM, and RMC are mentioned in the Companies Act? Am I missing some more terms? Do let me know.

It took me atleast 1-2 months to adjust to these terminologies even after I had an internship of 2 months in a similar field. So it will take time but you will get to it surely.

Idk which forum this was in, but it's not really possible.

On the date of pronouncement, the judgement is already ready. You can't squeeze in your appearance then.

Don't sweat over it. In the longer run, it doesn't even matter. And I'm not even saying 10-15 years; even two years down the line you would stop caring about it.

I've read your reply multiple times over the past few days. Out of all the advice I've received over this situation, yours has been the most helpful, reliable and practical. I've realized that I've been pretty immature in terms of dealing with the job, and at the same time taking myself too seriously. The way you've explained each of the situations I'm facing and answered all my questions has given me a lot of clarity with how I'm handling this and how I should proceed. Mr. Kacha Baniyan Gang, thank you for taking the time to explain all of this to me. I'll take this advice to heart and I genuinely appreciate what you've said. I've decided to continue litigation and hope to deal with my anxiety in the process. Thank you for all the help you've given me

1. Basic reading of accounts and interpretation is more than sufficient. You don't need to learn 'Accounts' beforehand. You will learn it on the job.

2. No, you don't need to be 'good' at math for Capital Structure. Basic knowledge is more than sufficient, you will need basic arithmetic skills (Class 7-8).

Read:
SEBI ICDR - Regulation 1 to 45 and Schedule VI;
SEBI LODR - Regulation 14 to 32;
Companies Act, 2013.

P.S - Please consider this practice for initial years only, earn some money, move to a better practice area.

In addition to the above, you can look at a firm called MV Kini as well. Have Air India as a client I believe and do solid all around work with Ravi Kini, a great name in this area. Has an office in both Delhi and Mumbai from what I could see on their website.

Another one is Tyabji Dayabhai. Super super reclusive firm but leading aviation practice. consistently ranked and always seems to (figuratively) "fly" under the radar. However, I think they are only based in Mumbai.

Gagrats does some stellar work in this field too so do check them out. Mumbai based firm though so keep that in mind.

Additionally, you can look at Kochhar, DSK and AZB as well, in case none of the above do work out for you.

Hope this helps:)

Its a bit hard to give aa straight yes or now answer to this question. but let me try and identify some of the variables that should lead us to some answers.

1. What are you planning to do your Ph.D on and does NLS have potentially good supervisors for those topics and are they in a position to supervise you. This is perhaps the most important of all considerations because your journey will depend a lot on how good and sensible your supervisor is. While at the end of the day a doctoral programme is more or less entirely in your hands, a good supervisor can make a world of difference (on both positive and negative ways). So no straight answer on this count- it depends entirely on your requirements.

2. institutional processes, standards and facilities - on this count NLS definitely ranks very high. The research infrastructure is good, the administration is supportive and largely does things on time. The chances that your ph.d will be delayed on account of administrative inefficiencies is minimal (not saying that things are perfect, but probably the best in India).

3. The chances for learning more and broadening your horizons. I think with the changes that sudheer has brought about (both in terms of content and the quality of available faculty), the course work is pretty good and it will give you a lot of opportunities to learn, think and reflect. There are also some opportunities to go abroad and spend some time for research visits. That being said, Jindal may give you more opportunities of the later variety,

Dont pay too much of attention to things like "brand value". in the long run and in the grand scheme of things Ph.D is also just a degree.

Disputes teams resolve disputes via courts, tribunals, arbitrations etc

Corp teams do transactional/advisory work: Adani wants to buy NDTV, so what regulations will have to be complied with, negotiating deals, preparing transaction documents (contracts), figuring out the needs of the client and the risks and draft contracts that protects your client/minimises risk etc

You look for job, that's what you do! If you feel you're not working at your optimal then for the sake of a steady career growth, you should keep an eye for a prospective role that wouldn't make you feel bored.
If you're in a situation which has the following requisites and it is seldom that you're free to that extent then you could try playing some mobile games or try dating someone to keep you engaged, atleast that's what I would've done.

“It gives me no pleasure to stand before you today, especially in this unscheduled manner”, began Thakur’s address to a gathering of the press at his residence. He spoke in a stern and low baritone voice, “We are facing an unprecedented attack on the Constitution under the current government and the acting president. Even during the emergency and with the passage of the forty-second amendment, the constitution was not as disfigured as what the latest amendment has done. It is all but a murder of this text that has, from the beginning, been the bedrock of our nation. The great lawyer and jurist, Nani Palkhivala, argued before this court in 1975 against Chief Justice A. N. Ray’s decision to review the basic structure doctrine. He passionately and eloquently showed the court that day that the country and the constitution will not survive overturning the basic structure. I am reminded of his words today as if they were prophetic and cautionary. I know it is improper for the highest functioning judicial officer to address the public directly in this manner, but I am afraid that if I do not do so now, it might be too late. I am, therefore, going to publicly disclose all the issues with the latest amendment, the unconstitutional judgment which enabled this amendment, and the unconstitutional actions which the government are further willing to take. First, on the thirteen-judge bench which overruled the Kesavananda decision and held that the parliament has an unrestrained and unlimited power to amend the constitution, including the power to modify, vary or repeal. Many judges are still unclear on the constitutional ground of this decision. This decision is not a result of any appeal from a high court. This decision is not a result of a reference from a lower bench of the supreme court to a larger constitutional bench. This decision was not the result of a reference for an advisory opinion by the president. This decision was purely the fruit of Justice Ramalingam’s efforts to subvert the constitution. Even the composition of the bench is suspect given that many senior judges in the supreme court were unwilling to review the basic structure doctrine and, as a result, no serious dissenter was appointed to the bench. Even the four dissenters in the judgment were specifically cherry-picked by the chief justice to give the decision a sense of legitimacy. Selection to the bench was not as per the convention of seniority in constitutional matters but according to the personal whims and predilections of Justice Ramalingam. If this is not gravely improper enough, there is more. In addition to the technical issue that a thirteen-judge bench is perhaps insufficient to overrule another thirteen-judge bench, the decision itself is subject to grave substantive errors. Judgment after judgment in the supreme court, over the last six decades, has consistently upheld the basic structure doctrine and has created a wealth of jurisprudence and discourse emanating from this doctrine. In its early years, it faced substantive criticism. But it must be kept in mind that over the years, the judiciary has evolved this doctrine with a great amount of care, consistency, rationality and thought. Even the famous jurist who was once against it, H. M. Seervai, later realized this doctrine’s importance for the country and supported it. Such an entrenched doctrine, such a well-respected and sophisticated doctrine, a doctrine adopted in many other jurisdictions after our landmark decision, has been wiped out due to malicious efforts and insidious aspirations. Mr. Palkhivala was right. No sooner did the bench hand out the decision overturning the basic structure doctrine, the government mutilated the constitution. Sacrosanct rights, the fundamental rights given to the people by the people, has been snatched away by a parliament and a government which had no authority to do so. The constitutional amendment has defaced the constitution and its trailblazing principles beyond recognition. We are left with but a trace of what was a great, historic, document. If that is not enough, I have credible information from a top administrative officer that the government is planning a supersession in the Supreme Court. If ever there was a doubt that things can become worse than 1975, the current events dissipate that. This, I truly believe, is the darkest of times that the country has ever faced. As the acting Chief Justice, I am left with no option but to inform the citizens of the country of the a-constitutional and unconstitutional state that we are living in now. No questions please. Thank you.”

---X---X---X---X

The five men were less stunned than frenzied. Ramalingam smoked cigarettes one after the other while watching Thakur’s speech. Soon after Varun turned the television off, Ramalingam, crimson-faced, yelled, “Who’s the leak? WHO THE *$CK is the leak??” Manohar, Panicker, Desai and Varun looked frozen, and visibly surprised with Ramalingam’s tone, who usually managed to maintain his composure even in the most pressing of circumstances. The telephone rang and Desai handed the cordless receiver from the table to Ramalingam. Ramalingam took the phone to an adjacent room to receive the call.

“It must be a staff here, Varun,” said Manohar. “This is treason” responded Varun, “We’ll have to get the IB to investigate the leak.” Ramalingam walked back and sat at his desk, his anger unmitigated and clearly visible on his face. The four men moved from the sofas to his table. “Sashikala informed me that the Home Ministry wants to book Thakur under the Official Secrets Act and possibly even sedition.” “NO! That will only make it worse, Ram. You need to do damage control now!” responded Manohar. “Yes, Mano. I told her that it will be extreme. She’s coming here. We need to figure out how to respond soon.”

“Well, I have an idea” spoke Desai, almost getting up from his chair, “Carry out the supersession irrespective of this. Banerjee’s party and its ideology is well received in the country. Mention that you are doing this to protect the vision and the ideology. That Thakur is unwilling to change to the needs of the country.” Ramalingam nodded as he lit another cigarette. “Sashikala is furious! She wants Thakur to pay a price for this,” Ramalingam informed, “anyways, Varun, draft a statement that Thakur is entirely wrong on the merits of overturning the basic structure. Gajendragadkar wrote a lot against the doctrine when he was the chairman of the law commission. Those arguments are good and you can use them. Also mention that the government can ask the supreme court to consider an issue without the president referring the matter for an advisory opinion. The court has suo-moto powers and the Chief Justice can constitute any bench as he deems fit for it, as the master of the roster. I also want the leak to be found on priority, I have a few guesses….”, the door opened interrupting Ramalingam. Sashikala walked in, and in a furious tone, informed the men in the room, “this guy needs to go! Who the hell does he think he is? Do you judges think that you are elected representatives?” As the four men searched for a response, Ramalingam advised her to calm down and poured her a glass of water. As she took a sip and kept the glass down, she sighed and asked, “Can we impeach him, Varun? We anyway wanted to supersede him, and now we can impeach him and Manohar can take the office?” “Perhaps, but we need a strong and public rebuttal against him first. You should probably go to the press today”, advised Varun. “Absolutely not. I am not going to be dragged into his nonsense. Ram, I will not have Thakur strike down the amendment! How can he even go to the press and speak about it when the matter is sub-judice?” asked Sashikala, still furious. “He has not constituted a bench yet, Mrs. Banerjee. Although it is absolutely improper for a sitting a judge to speak publicly on these matters, it is not sub-judice per se” said Desai in his slow pace. “No, no, no! The writs have already been filed. Once filed, the matter is sub judice” intervened Manohar. “I don’t really care! I want him impeached. I actually want to throw him behind bars, but Ram feels it will be too drastic” said Sashikala. Varun received a call on his cell phone. It was from the law secretary.

Thakur has constituted a bench to consider the writs against the amendment. Desai, Panicker, and Manohar are all part of a fifteen-judge bench which will review the constitutional amendment and the judgment that enabled it. Hearings will begin in one months’ time and the parties have been notified. Ramalingam looked at the composition of the bench and sneered. “This can go either way. We might fall short of the 8 votes we need. We need to impeach! Or, as Sashi says, we might need to bring in criminal charges against him.”

I would strongly suggest getting a place close to your office, because public transport is a little disorganised here. Maybe stay in a PG for a month or so while you hunt for flats, don't sign a lease without looking at the place because the construction quality in Town can be extremely unpredictable.

The Local serves the same purpose as the metro in Delhi, yes, but you also have to keep in mind that the network and the trains and the stations are decades older. So temper your expectations accordingly.

Anyway, if you're living in Town (South Bombay), it's unlikely you'll need to take the local to travel to office every day. It's mostly kaali-peeli cabs, which serve the purpose of autos in Town, since entry of autos is prohibited (I take it to the office whenever I'm running late, they run on metres and the fare is 40-50 rupees for 2.2 kms) or buses. I personally really like the buses, the network is very widespread and it is very easy to find a station near wherever you are. The only issue is, the traffic makes them a little unpredictable. So I usually take them only when I have a margin of 15-30 minutes. Or I just walk. 2kms isn't that much.

You will find several PGs around Fort area and Marine lines, a lot of colleges and offices are here, so the immigration rate is high. Since you are coming for a longer term, you can try looking for a flat as well. But the absolute lowest you can expect for a 1BHK is 30K and the lowest for a single occupancy room in a PG is 20K. Food extra. Even with flatmate(s) with everyone getting individual rooms, don't expect anything below 20K.
Mumbai is a very broker-heavy city, so your best bet is to look online or get in touch with some friends who know brokers. Maybe ask you office colleagues for some leads.

Helpful apps:
mIndicator (a guide to all modes of public transport in the city, vv helpful)
UTS (for booking Local tickets online. The ticketing queues are miles long)
Chalo (UTS for buses. The queues aren't the issue here, but it comes in handy if you don't have change)

Will preface by saying what an advocate with 20+ years of experience told me: "even 8 years is considered a short time in hardcore litigation."

1. Rule no. 1 - It may or may not get better. Sub-rule 1, don't compare transactional (specifically law firms) with litigation. Different rules of the game. For law firms, it's the toxic culture and overworking that leads to early burnouts - the work itself is repetitive and not as intellectually stimulating (at least at the initial levels since you would hardly ever get the complete picture unless you have a solid commercial sense). With litigation, you'd be up at night thinking about your clients' interests and ethical dilemmas; not to forget the constant running and high pressure environments (high pressure in a different sense compared to former). But the important thing is, stress can be managed in both situations, especially if toxicity is not the deciding factor. You are in your early years, so you practically have a lot to learn, the ABCs of practice. It is overwhelming at first but imo, you do get used to it. I would say talk to seniors first (someone with at least 15+ years of practice) - everyone at some stage has faced what you are facing.. If anxiety is something you struggle with generally, then seek some therapy because that will follow you no matter where you go, be it corp. or in-house. Sub-rule 2: Understand that in litigation, you WILL make mistakes... because every one makes them and you are no exception to it.

2. Rule no. 2 - nepotism is the name of the game. Understand that, appreciate that, and accept it with open arms. Doesn't mean you cannot succeed and make a killer living in the long term; just slightly harder to reach there. If you can solidify you courtroom skills, that bridge will certainly keep becoming smaller and smaller. What most people often forget is that litigation or even corporate law is about having a practice i.e. the ability to develop and maintain a clientele. Ofc your skills and pre-existing connections will play a huge role in that but the ability to get clients will decide your pay check, not necessarily the family connections you have (ofc there is an interdependence in the short term, but that weakens with the efflux of time). If you and your buddies work 4-5 years to specialise in a certain field (although as an AoR you'd need to be a generalist too), combining your skills and opening up a firm would be a great way to go ahead). Realistic possibility of success depends on your skills; I'm sorry but that is the answer (also see below) - if you have decent drafting and language skills, you already have an edge over most District court lawyers; as you move up the chain, lawyers become more polished.

3. Rule no. 3 - higher the risk, higher the reward. Theoretically speaking, from $$ pov, there are no ceilings in litigation - you have the ability to out-earn some of MPs of Corp firms (some of them get their major chunk from non-firm sources). But since your concern is stress, yes, in-house would be more suited even though from $$ pov, it would rank at the bottom. Your worry about lack of growth is also not misplaced. But you would learn commercial sense and business decision making as well. You can ofc make it work in long run but you know, this is a hard one to answer without knowing what your aspirations are. If you dream of rolling in money, I'm sorry, this would not be the best path since your PQE would hardly fetch you anything (although more than what you may be drawing in litigation at this time); (also tax implications would worse); the way forward would be to keep strategically switching companies to get a hike but the progression/ceiling would be slower/lower compared to the other two. If money is not your prime motivator, then ofc you can make it work - you could have a shot at healthy work-life balance (again not a guarantee). Also w/o knowing you exact aspirations, this can only be answered in abstract.
Might get downvoted for saying this but whether at a law firm or in litigation, it is that work-load, stress, and constant fear/anxiety of screwing up things that made the top-earners who they are. No one became great at what they do by putting in normal stress-free 8hr work days with a healthy work-life balance. Putting up with toxicity may not be a requisite (although common) but labouring is a requirement to succeed in this profession. Even though I say that corporate work may be less stimulating, but the partners who are at the top know their shit and have survived that vicious period.
Also, there may be other career prospects but I'm going to limit myself to only these three.

4. Rule No. 4 - there are no rules to life; only to the games contained therein. You can switch professions at any time. It's fine to change your mind about what you want to do. Remember, it's your life; if something takes a toll on your mental health and you have exhausted ways to deal with it, it's an indication that you ought to do something else. You are entitled to do what makes you happy. Ofc, there are obligations in everyone's lives that determines the actual choices they make, but I hope you get the drift.
To answer you pointed questions: yes MBA would be better if you plan to move abroad (although I do know a handful lawyers who did LLM abroad and got started in corporate abroad but it's way harder - this may merit another post and corporate lawyers may be better placed to answer the specifics). But I'd advise you to not see MBA as a backup or draw a positive correlation: if you don't like law, got for MBA but go hard at it; the law journey should end here although you may benefit from the knowledge, which you have gained so far, in some indirect way. Don't try to build up to MBA using law as a foundation - don't think MBA will help you as a lawyer to get into management etc; it will help anyone to transition to business side of things because that is what that professional degree is! It's a different professional course with a different career trajectory.
In so far as lateral career move in sales/marketing is concerned, well it's pretty abstract the way you frame it- people make a living doing that, correct? Feasibility would depend on YOUR aspirations and personality. I know a few people who work in brand management and it gets stressful at times; but they are not dealing with lives so it's a different kind of stress. There are different rules to that game and you should talk to someone owning that game to learn whether you'd be a good fit for it.

Rule no. 5. - You have to love the law at some level to be in this profession in the long term. The ones who make it to partner in corp. firms are able to find some value in the drudgery of the initial years and hence are willing to put up even with abuse (do not encourage or discourage; that's their prerogative). Those who make it as successful litigators have to love the law and welcome the stress/anxiety that court practice brings in.

Best of luck. Hope that is somewhat helpful.

You didn't mess up. First things first, let's say even if you had 10+ internships.. getting into corporate would've been impossible w/o contacts or an exemplary CV (again almost impossible w/o contacts, be it corporate or litigation). This is simply because of the existing nepotism in this profession and the monopoly/preference of Tier-1 NLUs in the context of Tier-1 law firms (again not a criticism of that culture - it is what it is). And you're from DU, so factor that in; your college prepares you better for litigation. And truth be told, you'd be slightly better equipped in certain areas than students from slightly better law colleges (again read this with emphasis on certain areas).

With litigation, you still would not have been making big bucks right out of college. The gestation period is longer, without any guaranteed success anyway. So yes, you did lose some time, maybe a couple of months, or even if you want to exaggerate, let's say a year. One year would hardly make a difference 10 years later. Hell, you could even catch up or zoom past others. Start counting the days from when you get your license. No breaks starting from that point because all you will do is work, work, and work. Until then, read... and then read some more.. whether it's procedure, case laws, commentaries, drafting, practice itself..Try to learn about what you haven't learned in college...watch online how Advocates argue. Litigation is about the long game, not the short game. Ofc, you have to be grounded and understand that it will take time to blossom and still, it may or may not align with your ambitions.

Since you are clear you want to enter litigation and are first gen, I would recommend not starting with Senior Advocates; for the same reason Tier 1 firms would not have been interested - some of these positions are filled up via contacts or exemplary CVs (again contacts). Bud, nepotism is the rule of this game, whether it's that hotshot corporate firm or a Senior Advocate. With that in mind, start lower - the goal is to develop your skills in the first 6-8 years - that includes being able to handle a case right from the trial court stage to the appellate stage. Trial practice and appellate practice are similar but different games and you must get some trial court experience - even though oversaturated, it continues to be one of the most difficult areas to master, for evidence (in majority of cases) is appreciated at this stage. So start low, and climb your way to a senior advocate.

Always prepare a date chart and summary of arguments / case note. It might seem tedious but it really reduces your work as a briefing counsel. Additionally, whoever is the Senior's associate/junior does not have to read through the entire file at the last moment to assist their Senior after the conference / briefing.

Can't comment on how his team/work profile is at AZB but can say based on having worked with him at CAM that he is a gem of a person - extremely knowledgeable, quite sharp, very patient (which isn't easy given that he didn't always have the best junior level resources but I can't recall more than a handful of instances where he even remotely seemed upset - and even then he didn't get abusive). In terms of work, he handled fairly top notch work in B&F - which isn't necessarily saying much given that banking teams do EXTREMELY mundane work (even compared to their corporate counterparts). Don't think he was given his due at CAM (honestly, he should have been promoted sooner but maybe there was a business reason for the delay in partnership - really can't say) and hopefully he is getting a better treatment at AZB.

Having sung his praises (and there is much to be sung), it is worth noting that he is a workaholic and his team routinely stayed late in office (often later than most other teams except the projects/cap marks types - but then again they aren't the gold standard of work life balance) and he did expect his juniors to work as hard as him. He set the standards though, and didn't cut early and let his juniors suffer; he was in the trenches with them till late, which is admirable, but the extreme workaholism could be a potential downside if you're looking to join his team (assuming that he has carried on this way we AZB which wouldn't be unsurprising).

Bottom-line: he's an exceptional senior, and truly invests in you, but the work is hard and can be tedious.

I see some contradiction. You mentioned that the associates feel compelled to go and attend the sessions. Whereas in the same paragraph, you mentioned that the game was cancelled due to lack of numbers and also the attendances are never too high. Do not you think that, if there was actually a compulsion, or the associates thought it to be a compulsion, there would be more number of players to participate?

And, why do not you think that it as an opportunity to break ice with the other partners, team members. I have no idea how your team functions, or for that, how are the cricket teams drawn up. But I would hazard a guess that, each team would have members from different practice areas, working under different teams. I think it provides an wonderful opportunity to get to work (play) in tandem with other team/ practice area members, which you may not otherwise get if your practice area is niche or does not require interaction with the members outside your team.

Finally, please stop attributing your own incompetence or others' competence to external factors. I am sure, even if you play each subsequent matches being organised, it would have no impact on your rating/bonus.

You've glossed over the genuine red flag here: playing on ASTRO Turf? Are they playing tape ball? Good God, please share the fim name so that in-house counsel can avoid these people. If they were playing proper cricket on a proper pitch you of course would come off as a standoffish snot for not joining in once in a while. But, under these conditions, I salute your devotion to our beautiful game. Continue your principled refusal to play with these plebians!

I am not sure how much exactly Cyril Shroff donated to Oxford. He does not seem to have mentioned the sum in the press release. But below are some figures from lawyers abroad below. All links at the end to make reading easier. It's very interesting that some of the law schools are ranked pretty low , some of the donors preferred to stay anonymous, some of the donors donated via their will, and some of the donors are professors.

Moderator: requesting featured status for my research 🌝🌝🌝

- Penn Law School: USD 125 million from WP Carey Foundation (founded by an alum and run by his descendants who are also alumni)

- Northwestern University Law School: USD 100 million from JB Pritzker (an alum who became a famous entrepreneur and later Governor of Illinois)

- Pepperdine University School of Law: USD 50 million from Rick Caruso (an alum who went into business)

- Notre Dame Law School: USD 50 million by an alum who went into the real estate business

- Duquesne University Law School: USD 50 million from Thomas Kline (a criminal trial lawyer)

- Drexel University: USD 50 million, also from Thomas Kline

- George Mason University Law School: USD 50 million from a. judge, through his will

Michigan Law School: USD 33 million from an alum

- Cornell Law School: USD 25 million from an alum who wants to stay anonymous

- Stanford Law School: USD 25 million from an alum who is CEO of a Fortune 500 company

- University of Pacific School of Law: USD 25 million from alum Robert Eglet (an alum who is a criminal trial lawyer)

- Duke Law School: USD 15 million (over an extended period) by Rick Horvitz (an alum who worked for a private investment firm)

- Chicago Law School: USD 15 million by Dave Rubinstein, an alum who is chair of a private equity firm

- Villanova University Law School: USD 13 million from an alum who works in investment banking

- University of British Columbia: 11.86 million Canadian $ from an alum

- Vanderbilt University Law School: USD 10 million from an alum who is a private equity entrepreneur

- Georgetown Law: USD 10 million by an alumni couple

- Boston College Law School: USD 10 million by an alum who is an in -house counsel

- Indiana University Law School: USD 9 million by multiple alumni pooling in

- Chicago Law School: USD 7 million from Kirkland & Ellis

- Marquette University Law School: USD 5 million from an alum who is a real estate lawyer

- Cumberland University Law School: USD 5 million from an alum

- University of Ottawa: Canadian $ 5million from an alum

- Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law : USD 4.5 million from an anonymous alum

- UCLA: USD 4 million from a professor

- Creighton University Law School: USD 4 million from a 91 year old lady in her will, who was an alum.

- Rutgers Law School: USD 3.5 million from a. law school professors who requested anonymity

- Northern Kentucky University Law School: USD 3 million from an alum

- Drake University Law School: USD 3 million from an alum

- University of Miami Law Schoo: USD 2.5 million by an alum

- Case Western University Law School: USD 2 million from the will of a former professor there

- University of South Carolina Law School USD 1.2 million from the will of a former professor there

- University of Tennessee in Chattanooga Law School: USD 1.2 million from a local law firm

- University of Missouri: USD 1 million from a local lawyer

- University of Kansas: USD 1 million from the same local lawyer above

- St Mary's University School of Law Texas: USD 1 million from an anonymous alum (in his/her will)

- UC Hastings: USD 1 million from a professor

https://alumni.creighton.edu/news-events/news/creighton-law-cleaver-scholarship
https://www.sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/law/about/news/2022/gift-honors-late-professor.php
https://wwws.law.northwestern.edu/campaign/pritzkers/
https://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2022/09/07/duquesne-university-law-school-thomas-r-kline-donation-ken-gormley-50-million-philanthropy/stories/202209070097
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/mcgeorge-law-says-trial-lawyers-25-mln-gift-will-expand-access-2021-10-12/
https://www.pepperdine.edu/newsroom/articles/pepperdine-school-law-announces-historic-50-million-commitment-alumnus-rick-j.htm
https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/w-p-carey-foundation-makes-historic-125-million-gift-name-penns-law-school
https://www.chattanoogan.com/2022/9/14/455815/1.2-Million-Gift-Made-To-UT-Promise.aspx
https://giving.duke.edu/gift-announcement/gift-from-law-school-alum-endows-program-devoted-to-constitutional-and-public-law/
https://vanderbilthustler.com/2021/11/09/vanderbilt-university-law-school-receives-10-million-gift-from-alumnus/
https://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/media/pressreleases/2021/villanova-law-receives-13-million-dollar-gift-from-widger-family.html
https://today.marquette.edu/2021/12/marquette-law-school-receives-5-million-gift-to-establish-the-andrew-center-for-restorative-justice/
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/david-rubenstein-renews-rubenstein-scholars-program-law-school-15-million-gift
https://thedaily.case.edu/case-western-reserve-university-school-of-law-receives-2-million-estate-gift-for-chaired-professorship/
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2021/12/01/stueve-siegel-hanson-missouri-scholarship-fund.html
https://blog.texasbar.com/2021/12/articles/news/st-marys-university-school-of-law-receives-1-8-million-gift/
https://news.iu.edu/stories/2020/11/iub/releases/11-maurer-school-of-law-receives-major-gifts.html
https://news.miami.edu/stories/2021/12/school-of-law-receives-2.5-million-gift.html
https://thehoya.com/georgetown-law-receives-34-million-from-historic-graduate-gifts/
https://6abc.com/313655/
https://news.nd.edu/news/alumnus-harry-fath-makes-50-million-gift-to-notre-dame/
https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/06/law-school-announces-25-million-gift
https://news.drake.edu/2015/02/18/2015-littonestategift/
https://www.cumberland.edu/cumberland-university-receives-largest-gift-in-schools-180-year-history/
https://news.umich.edu/lisa-and-christopher-jeffries-commit-33-million-to-michigan-law-for-student-support/
https://communications.catholic.edu/news/2021/04/law-originalism-gift.html
https://www.diverseeducation.com/news-roundup/article/15108458/rutgers-universitycamden-receives-35-million-for-law-school-scholars-program
https://www.kirkland.com/news/press-release/2006/02/kirkland--ellis-gives-7-million-gift-to-the-univer
https://historyproject.allard.ubc.ca/law-history-project/milestone/peter-allard-donates-1186-million-law-school-ubc
https://chaselaw.nku.edu/current-students/news/news/alumnus-w--bruce-lunsford-donates--3-million-to-chase--largest-g.html
https://law.ucla.edu/news/gift-exceeding-4-million-endows-chairs-native-american-law-and-policy
https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/bcnews/nation-world-society/law-and-politics/gift-establishes-marianne-short-deanship-at-bc-law.html
https://www.law.gmu.edu/news/2019/scalia_law_school_receives_largest_gift_in_mason_history
https://news.stanford.edu/2018/10/22/law-school-expands-global-law-program-25-million-gift-alumnus-william-franke/
https://www2.uottawa.ca/about-us/media/news/transformational-5m-gift-susan-perry-dellelce-aims-revitalize-student-experience-university-ottawas

I am an A0 at a T1 currently. The only advice I can give you is that the more mistakes you make at your early stages in the profession, the lesser you are to repeat them further down the road.
So, take it on the chin, and make sure you try to not repeat the same msiatkes you have made again.

I am old now. Having graduated in 2011 from a NLU. I will give you the practical advise needed-which you need not necessarily start learning in the final year-but can act as your survival guide. Rather mistakes that you can learn from:

1. Identify the power circles in your team. Make sure you latch onto one such centre. This will protect you and take you a long way.
2. Cover your ass. Learn how to put everything in writing at all points of time. And learn to always pass the buck, when required.
3. College issues and rivalries do play out in the working world as well. Therefore, if there is someone who is out to screw you over-make sure that you make peace rather than fighting a losing battle.
4. Learn to make small talk, and becoming popular-the route to partnership depends on this-not on merit.
5. Indulge in bickering and politics. It is important. The person who is closest to the partner's cabin, also has the most impact on appraisals.
6. Host events, lunches, dinners, beer parties. [...] Also, become part of the inter law firm tournaments to be known as the guy from firm X, Y, Z. Your identity is your firm.
7. Learn how to proof read effectively. If you spot an error, which is typographical or numerical also. Make sure to shout, scream and bring the roof down. Theatricals go a far way.
8. Corporate deal negotiations aren't about skill or expertise. They are just a sophisticated form of bullying. Corporate lawyers can sniff out a weaker opponent like a wolf hound. Therefore, learn how to put up a farce. To illustrate. In India. Practically, nobody can enforce an indemnity. Yet days on end will be negotiated on this clause. Eventually, the person with the louder wise and the better wise cracks will win.
9. Spend time during the night byhearting concepts, or having beer with your senior and learn from him/her.

Trust me. If you follow all of the above. You will reach partnership in record time. I've seen it happen.

Allowing a child to study their interest is the right way towards parental guidance, rather than forcing them to stick to a subject that isn’t their interest. With proper discussion about interests, one can understand the genuine interest of their child. For Example, if your child is interested in law, it has various diversions under one primary subject. You can guide them about promising futures in the field of interest by sharing how they can stand out from the herds of professionals. In India, everyone is looking for a patent, and only a lawyer can help them attain one. Plus, it is a good-paying career that allows one to become a significant contributor to the economy. Every brand needs a legal guardian, and a committed professional can contribute by offering the right pathway to the brand. Parents need to educate themselves about a variety of career options that are less competitive and have a handsome salary for the betterment of their child’s future.

Mr M. Damodaran, the (then) Chairman of SEBI visited NLSIU in 2007 (or 8) and delivered what was at least partly, a pre-placement talk. In course of this session, he categorically mentioned that he didn't expect "bright" law graduates to remain with SEBI for more than a couple of years. His pitch as a recruiter was that SEBI offers a good and reasonably well paid "first job" and one should not join with the intention to spend his/her entire working life with SEBI. From what I have gathered (over the past few years) after speaking with few friends and acquaintances working with SEBI, pay and allowances wise, among "public sector" employers, it is perhaps one among the best, but working hours depend mostly on the team/Member one works with and promotions aren't time-bound or as regular they need to be.

1. There is negative marking for every wrong attempt. I attempted 48 out of 50 legal questions in mains which took my score down, should've left it at 42-43.
2. I did not take any resource for the legal papers, was also preparing for Judicial services so i was used to reading bare acts in a preparation mode. I did saw some videos to tackle the reasoning part on youtube. I dont think you have to take any coaching for that. The only thing you should once take a note of is the previous year questions to get an idea of what you will be getting. There are multiple videos on YT for that too.
3. Constitutional law you will have to do, there is no other way. Again, keep reading the bare act only.
They only ask a couple of questions from CPC in both pre and mains. It won't be your downfall, it won't get you to clear the paper. Just get a reading of the important parts. Get to it only after you've covered everything else.

I have spent too much time redlining and sometimes “negotiating” NDAs over the course of my career and at various organisations (both law firms and in-house). I find it to be a colossal waste of time. At this point, barring NDAs that are signed for specific use cases (particularly M&A deals), I really think these should just be standardised as industry practice atleast domestically. I’m curious to know from litigators how many times they’ve seen NDAs actually become a subject of dispute in their careers though. As a commercial lawyer, it’s so hard to calculate risk when you have no overview of how often things go south. In most cases, lawyers who negotiate agreements are long gone by the time those agreements actually become a subject of dispute.

TIA!

Honestly, just ask!! You will be surprised how easy it is to get some of these things. Sure a lot if it depends on the culture at your firm and you'll be the best judge of that. But at my place they did want young associates to get a flavour of everything (at least the partner of my team), so whenever the other teams needed some extra hands on deck, I was pulled in - still am from time to time. Of course, just make sure it doesn't get too much / overwhelming, it can escalate into absoluetely drowing in work soon enough !

I've been working for all of three months, so my perspective is limited. It's good that you want to prepare in advance, that is very important. But at the same time, don't forget to enjoy your college life. This one year is when you're truly free to do what you want, recreational stuff and constructive-but-doesn't-boost-employability stuff.

To answer your question, you could start by watching the Corp law lecture series on YouTube by Jindal. It gives a very good overview of MnA. GC teams work on anything and everything related to companies, but the work can broadly be categorised into advisory and transactional.

Get into the habit of reading a business/financial newspaper, or at the very least, the business page of a general newspaper. Develop commercial awareness. This is what most lawyers lack, imo. They know the law, but ultimately, our job is to facilitate the business.

One legislation that gives GC lawyers a lot of grief is FEMA and associated rules If you're familiar with them, it'll go a long way in helping you. Start with the FDI Policy and NDI, then ODI, then, if you still have time, Debt.

You can also look at the deal updates from your team to see what kind of work they primarily do and do some focused prep for that.

Good luck!

I can write but the agony of the litigants is best understood when you visit the trial courts. The nonchalance of the advocates and the government is marked and loathsome. Those with muscle and financial power manage to strike a settlement out of the court. It is the financially backward who get sandwiched between the judiciary (which has no machinery to complete a suit in five years) and the advocates who do their best to protract the proceedings by misleading the court with a number of petitions and utterly misleading pleadings.

The police too render no support in prosecution. The PPs are absent and no criminal matter is heard during the day. I remember visiting a district court once and the pitiable judge had to find excuses to adjourn matters as there was neither a typist nor a stenographer to take evidence. There were about fifty people present in the court and the matters could barely move further. He spent the half the time doing the call work. This is a concept you would understand only if you visit a trial court.

You need to see the kind of support staff the judges get. Courts which require a strength of 20 people atleast work with a strength of ten people and the advocates and the government have to take the maximum blame. I remember the judge asking the advocate to commence trial and the advocate refusing to do since it is 2021 matter and there are other matters pending. You put your foot down and insist on the commencement of trial, be prepared to face malicious attacks from the bar and a barrage of anonymous complaints.

If I get time over the weekend, I can explain the problems faced in criminal and civil matters in detail. Of course, criminal would encompass NI Act cases and domestic violence cases, cases under the EC Act, POCSO Act, SC and ST Act, NDPS Act and many such uncountable legislations.

Wow. The same guy under whose watch the govt lost man important cases and who was accused by Subramanian Swamy of leaking details of the 2G scam case to the DMK.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/mukul-rohatgi-kk-venugopal-mukul-rohatgi-to-return-as-attorney-general-after-kk-venugopal-retires-say-sources-3339387

First of all, no one knows when the exam will be. The being said, if we assume it is in March 2023 then believe me, you have ample time to cover the syllabus multiple times. Focus more on the securities and company law. Go through their bare act as many times as you can. I cleared Sebi grade A's pre last year with a couple of months of preparation although i couldn't make it through mains due to over attempting the questions. And don't forget the part 1 of phase 1 exam, the reasoning paper. People often ignore it only to not being able to clear the pre itself because of that.

Hi, if you want practice as a solicitor in the UK you would have to complete SQE and have two years of work experience https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/career-advice/becoming-a-solicitor/qualifying-from-abroad-to-work-in-england-and-wales

After the 2021 reform, any graduate (even non-law) can sit for the SQE exam

GDL/MA law equivalence degrees are only required if you want to be a barrister, for that route you need GDL/MA law equivalence -> bar course -> pupillage

may i suggest having a chat with the hr personnel at the law firm where you will be applying to check if you can get the SQE prep training from their prep provider, most law firms have tie up with uni of law or city uni; with 3-4 months prep sqe is quite easy

It can be done within 3 months with 3 hours of prep each day. The SEBI and allied acts are very simple. Companies Act can take some time. Read last time's notification and only prepare what will come in the course. A lot of chapters are not part of syllabus. Skip CPC, CRPC, IPC, IBC if you dont have time. These acts will only account for at max 5 questions out of 50. Make sure you write killer essays to boost your score.

Really ? Visit a trial court for a week and then understand the situation yourself. There are a plethora of the reasons for the delay. While the government is the biggest culprit, the advocates add to the misery of the litigations. Not to mention their lobby and ever apparent collusion to ruin the life of litigants.

On the administrative side, please understand the governments barely invest in the infrastructure. If there is no typist in the court, the entire court comes to a halt for the day ! The civil bench clerk goes on leave, the civil matters get adjourned. The situation is different for criminal matters. In fact, for the criminal matters, things come to a stand still for many reasons. The court PC is absent and PPs are reluctant to take up cases. If the PP is absent, there is none to help the witness and brief him about the dates mentioned in the chargesheet.

If the staff is present, the advocates take up numerous adjournments saying the documents are ready but not signed by the parties. If you impose costs or dismiss matters , be ready to submerged under complaints.

I remember visiting a trial court and the advocate seeking time in a 2015 money recovery suit. Can you guess the amount involved ? 1 lakh.

I can go on but let the government and advocates show some empathy. The things would then change forever.

I am part of a big team consisting of over 20 lawyers just in my team. What I’ve realised is being part of a big team leads to certain communication and structural issues. I think this is compounded by the fact that as lawyers we don’t have any formal training in management so at best you are at the mercy of your seniors who you hope have picked up management skills over the years and not just the skills of drafting and negotiation.

Some problems I have identified:

1. Lack of interaction with partner: While our head partner has a brand name, and is an excellent lawyer, since there are too many people in the team, there is hardly any direct interaction with him. So there isn’t much direct value add except for the brand name of having “worked under him”.

2. Lack of team spirit: While team spirit may sound like an unnecessary luxury, when you are spending 12+ hours on the job everyday with the same people, it becomes crucial to have a sense of trust and community, to know you have a support system in place. While all team members are decent folks, since there are so many of us, there is a lack of “bonding” among colleagues, which I have seen is present in smaller teams. I have spoken to people in smaller teams and felt it does help in different ways.

3. Communication issues: Since seniors are involved across several matters with different sets of people, sometimes they may forget to communicate/ not realise that they have not communicated certain things which they have told certain juniors (matter specific or maybe even general advice)

4. Workload distribution: This is probably the most important point. Because there are so many of us, I feel even seniors have a difficult time tracking who has how much work. Sometimes you are just getting crushed under work, other times it’s a dry spell (but you are also constantly worried that you might suddenly be called onto several matters at once). Again, not great for your mental health either.

My biggest takeaway has been that once you go higher up the corporate ladder, the job isn’t just about lawyering. It’s probably 60% law and 40 % management. So great management becomes crucial.
While my team does have few practices to tackle these issues, they aren’t always very effective. Would love to hear from some senior folks or others working in big teams how they have solved these issues.

Thanks.

Hey, I've been going to trial courts for 3+ years. I hope that makes me "qualified" enough to comment on this. I find that your opinions and worldviews are quite biased, and frankly, annoying.

Yes, metros and non-metros are very different. So what? Do you have a point other than solely telling others how they actually are privileged and really inferior to you?

Hey, having been through something similar myself I’m gonna ask the obvious first: have you considered therapy?

It certainly helps you manage your panic attacks and ground yourself better. Other than that as clichéd as it sounds, try to give yourself the room to make mistakes, people may be mean to you but try that it doesn’t translate into you being harsh on yourself, just learning the lesson is enough. I have found that allowing yourself that room leads to making less errors anyway.
Remind yourself that a lot of your energy is also being spent on battling your anxiety so it is more taxing than before but as your mental health improves, so will your work and confidence.
Reach out to people and talk if you need to, revive your interests, do it one step at a time and set really small goals if it is too overwhelming. It’s often the time we spend away from work that helps us perform better. You’ll regain your confidence eventually and be as you were (perhaps a tad wiser as well)

Good Luck!

Bangalore resident here. You should be OK getting in. Getting out will sometimes be an issue. There's a nasty U-Turn as you leave office, and it can take you 20 minutes or so to clear that. After that, it's normal traffic. 40 minutes is not an unrealistic estimate. If you're Ubering, you can save time by simply crossing the road.

If you can WFH sometimes, this is not a bad place to stay. Richmond Town is an excellent location, and you will be grateful on weekends. It gives you access to parts of town you can only dream of, if you were staying in Sarjapur Road or Koramangala.

For Cayman Islands -

https://www.cilpa.ky/professionals

General Admission as an attorney of a solicitor, barrister or advocate from other jurisdictions

People who are not Caymanian or do not hold Caymanian status may be eligible for admission to practice law if they have qualified in The United Kingdom, Jamaica or other Commonwealth jurisdictions recognised as being equivalents, for example, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Admission in these circumstances requires the applicant to obtain an offer of employment from a law firm in the Cayman Islands, which must have also secured a work permit under Part V of the Immigration Law (2015 Revision). The applicant for admission must also have at least three years’ post-qualification experience at the time the application for the work permit is made. The Legal Practitioners Laws and Regulations govern all aspects of training and qualifying as an attorney-at-law. The admission process is governed under section 3(1) of the Legal Practitioners Law, where a Judge of the Grand Court is responsible for hearing applications from eligible candidates for admission to practice law. CILPA is not responsible for, and has no control over, the process of admitting persons to practice law in the Cayman Islands.

It will be difficult, Australia is a very costly country to live in.

Additionally, since you did litigation in Civil and Criminal matters, you won't be able to practice 'foreign law', which requires no test, compliance etc. It is a person practicing and assisting clients with home jurisdiction matters, since there will be hardly anyone requiring litigation in Delhi from Australia, this won't happen.

Now, to practice the Law of Australia, your LLB is enough, but you also need to seek approval of an admitting authority, who reviews academic record and then allows you to complete their Practical Legal Training (PLT) course. The cost of the PLT course will have to be covered by the candidate and it will be for 12 months. This depends on if the admitting authority deems your academic record ok for the PLT course. The candidate also two years before seeking admission with authority, must undertake the International English Language Testing System Academic Module (IELTS) test and must obtain a minimum score of 7.0 for reading and listening, 7.5 for speaking, and 8.0 in writing, in the components of the test. Since you have said that you are not well versed with English, this may be very tough for you to achieve. This requirement is universal for everyone overseas, maybe except New Zealand, so going through Canada will not be more beneficial.

Considering that you have great experience on ground level but do not have a good academic record as well as good understanding of the theoretical subjects (admin law + tort law of common law jurisdiction) (I assumed this since you said your marks are low), it may be very difficult to jump through all these hoops to even practice there or even the admitting authority even allowing you to do so. The cost of the PLT course is also very expensive around 15,000 dollars.

Looking at all of these factors, I would advise getting backdated internship or work certificates made in the service industry (you are in litigation, can do it easily) and look to get a job in the service industry in Australia.

With the cost of living and your wife's student loans, the financial burden on your family, along with that of raising your 2 kids will be very high, so a dual income household is extremely necessary.

I wish you best of luck, just hope that your spouse's and your joint decision for her to follow her dream does not negatively impact your family's financial standing and future. Since you earning 12 Lakhs in litigation (mostly without income tax purview) + your wife working in Delhi in the IT sector where you guys have no loans to pay, is conservatively around 18-20 lakhs a year which is very good to have a burden free life with financial security for your kids in a dual income household. You have struggled and done so well to be where you are and also dedicated years acquiring skills in litigation, now you will have to give up your standing and financial security to work which will almost certainly non-law related. So keep this psychological impact in mind.

Good Luck, hope everything goes great.

The same isn't a surety in Australia, its a huge risk. I say because I saw one of my school classmates going through the same things (non-law) in the business sector there.

Here are some links for you-

https://ielts.com.au/australia/prepare/article-ielts-for-lawyers#:~:text=To%20enter%20the%20legal%20profession,IELTS%20band%20score%20of%208.0.

https://www.collaw.edu.au/learn-with-us/our-programs/practical-legal-training-programs

https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-indian-lawyers-australia/

Soft Skills 100. That's what a major chunk of ADR is. You improve your speaking skills, being able to put your thoughts in words which fully express what you mean, and listening. There are tons of videos on YouTube about various types of ADR competitions. You watch them and develop a style taking from those. Participate in competitions, the more you participate, the more you learn. Especially focus on the feedback sessions, those can really help. Best of Luck!

“Sir, the judges are here”, informed Kiran. “Okay, give us a couple of minutes, I’ll let you know when to send them”, responded Ramalingam, as he perused one of the files brought in by Varun. As Kiran left the room, Ramalingam told Varun, without looking away from the files, “I think Manohar and Desai will budge, but Panicker might put up some resistance.” “Let’s try our best”, responded Varun, “are you going to tell them about contesting?” “Yes, that will certainly come up”, said Ramalingam as he sipped on his coffee and stubbed his cigarette. Varun was pondering while looking outside the window. After finishing the file, Ramalingam picked up the phone and informed Kiran to send the judges in.

“To what do we owe this pleasure, Mr. President?” asked Manohar as he walked into the chambers, followed by Panicker and Desai. “To discuss some important matters pertaining to the Court, Mano”, said Ramalingam as he stood up to shake his hand. “Please, sit down” said Ramalingam as he also shook Desai and Panicker’s hands. “Let’s cut to the chase, the cabinet is thinking of appointing you as the next chief justice, Mano, and I support it” said Ramalingam, in a determined voice. The three judges looked at each other, taken aback. For a few seconds the room was still, filled with an awkward silence, with only the chirps of the birds outside.

Panicker was the first to speak, still with a surprised expression on his face, “Ram, are you serious?” “Come on Panicker, you know Thakur is not the best fit for the position”, responded Ramalingam, to be interjected by Manohar immediately, “but you can’t supersede, Ram. Your government has just passed a major constitutional amendment, this will be very inappropriate and belittle any appearance of judicial independence, especially given that Thakur’s views on the amendment is not really a secret.” Desai adjusted his spectacles, and spoke in his slow, high-pitched tone, “also Ram, according to 62, the presidential elections should be held within six months. You still have one and a half years in your tenure as Chief Justice. Do you not plan to return to office?” Ramalingam quickly glanced at Varun before responding to Desai, “I plan on contesting. I will hand in my resignation as Chief Justice next week.” “Okay, that is your choice Ram, but I still don’t think superseding will reflect well at all!” said Panicker, with a force not untypical of him. Manohar leaned forward in his chair, with a worried expression, “I have to agree, Ram. This will not just raise serious doubts about your government, but it will also rip off all credibility in the institution. You do know how the bar and the bench reacted to Ray and Beg. I don’t want to be in that position”. Ramalingam looked unfazed, and without any sign of exasperation on his face, he began to explain his position. “We have all spoken about how much Thakur is resistant to the new vision. Even in our meetings, you have seen how unamenable he is when it comes to establishing a new form of state. Not only do we all agree that this is the best path to move ahead in, but even you know that a strong judiciary is required to make this vision last. Come on, Mano, don’t you believe in what we are doing here? And Desai? Panicker? Both of you have on numerous occasions agreed with me on this, at least on principle. Can we allow any risks, especially at this stage? You know how hard it has been to get here.” “Ram, but this is all progressing very quickly, and will raise a lot of speculation. Two presidents have died, and conspiracy theories on that are continuing unabated, a major constitutional amendment has been passed, and now a supersession? We will embarrass ourselves even globally!” said Panicker, clearly unsatisfied with Ramalingam’s explanation. “Sir, I don’t think we need to worry about global reaction” intervened Varun, “even the US has understood the importance of religion for the state. You have seen how their constitutional law changed after Dobbs, and there was some initial hullabaloo, but look how they managed to change. I think the world is finally understanding that religion and state are inseparable, and even spiritually necessary. As far as the latter is concerned, we will be leading by example with the changes we are making. Clearly there is a reason for the Holy Roman Empire to have been much more successful than the Roman Empire.” “Yes, I agree Varun, but look at the timing” came Panicker’s response. “There is no better time for this, Panicker”, said Ramalingam, “we have made just the first step. If we don’t progress now, it might never happen. And to be honest with you, after all the effort that has gone into it, I am not ready to see the amendment stricken down.”

“Okay, Ram, I understand your passion, but give it a month. You anyway have some time in this office still, so if you want to do this, let it happen after some time”, said Manohar, in a defeated tone. “Yes, that’s a good idea. If this has to be done, let there be some space for things to settle down a bit” chimed Desai. Ramalingam nodded and turned to Panicker, who was shaking his head, as he sighed, unable to agree with his colleagues. “I understand your consternation, Panicker”, said Ramalingam, “you have always been the one to seriously think about important issues, I have always admired that. But I ask you to trust me on this. You and I don’t share different visions, we both agree that this path is required. Trust my word when I tell you that everything I am doing is only to see its fulfilment.” Panicker gazed at Ramalingam, almost as if reading his face for clues on his sincerity. “Ok Ram, but if we going to do this….” the telephone rang, interrupting Panicker. Ramalingam picked it up. It was Sashikala on the other side. “Yes Sashi?” said Ramalingam, “WHAT?? Okay.” He kept the receiver down, and his face was panic-stricken. “Varun, turn on the tv”, he said as he lit a cigarette, “Thakur has gone to the press, he is giving an interview now.” “What?” squeaked Desai, in disbelief. Everyone stood up and hurriedly walked to the other side of the room. Varun quickly reached for the remote and turned the television on. As soon as he turned the news channel on, they saw Thakur speaking from a podium, looking down on what appeared to be a written statement. Below it, a headline blared: “CHIEF JUSTICE ACCUSES PRESIDENT OF PLANNING A SUPERSESSION!”

Two aspects to consider - one is that it is an industry focused practice, and the other is that it is a highly regulated space. Both offer it’s own advantages, but of course it may not be for everyone.

An industry focused practice (as opposed to a area focused practice such as M&A, PE/VC, labour, IP, etc.) gives you the benefit of being able to work on various legal aspects, but specifically for this industry. That means that you could be drafting contracts for drug distribution or clinical trials (commercial), handling a litigation/administrative hearing against a regulator/competitor/consumer or even intra-industry complaints before industry bodies (disputes), advising on confidentiality breaches where an employee shares proprietary data or technology with a competitor company (HR), advising on compliances for sharing clinical data or preparing a privacy policy/ToU for a digital health platform (data privacy/tech), advising and preparing documentation for a brand license/transfer/acquisition, sale/purchase of a manufacturing facility (Corp), or even structuring activities for digital health companies due to FDI restrictions/regulatory restrictions (exchange control++). Ultimately, you deal with quite a bit of various areas of law, which broadens your thinking and application.

Because it’s heavily regulated, you also advice the business on every aspect of its functioning. From R&D, import, manufacture, marketing, promotion, wholesale, retail to pricing. New age companies are looking to disrupt every area of the product/service lifecycle as well. Commercial activities of the sector are shaped a lot by its regulations, so advising on and being exposed to this side on a daily basis really develops your commercial acumen. You also quickly learn what actually matters to clients and companies, which improves your own service delivery.

The takeaway really is that the practice helps you develop yourself holistically as a lawyer. Contrary to what people may think, the only ‘real’ work is not limited to transactions. It’s an important aspect, yes, but only a small part of what is otherwise a very vast area with many sub-sectors and specialities. As the space grows, we may see even more specialised practices (for example, teams handling only medical devices or digital health, or just regulatory litigations for pharma/medical device) as in other foreign firms, but we are a long way off.

In terms of firms, there are transaction focused pharma / life science teams and there are full fledged industry focused teams. There is a growing interest in this space, and more firms are looking to expand their practices. There are only a handful of lawyers in this space, so it’s a great opportunity to join the bandwagon early on and make a career out of it. Even if not long term, the learnings are definitely transferable and will help you in other areas/industries, and even more so if you decide to go in-house later on.

Dear Pi,
Thank you so much for helping us out. My main question is: how do practice areas and mobility relate? From what I'e heard, lateral shifts only really work for cap marks, BnF and funds. For everything else, it's a one-in-a-million thing.
So, my question is: I've currently joined a PE/VC team in a T2 firm. Should I look to change practice areas if I want to shift? I would've applied for a TC in law school itself, but I had a very mediocre CV. But should I consider applying for a TC now, after some work ex? I don't mind compromising on a max of 3 years of PQE (one year's work ex before applying plus the two-year waiting period). It's a lot, but it's a trade-off I'm willing to make if it gives me a good shot. My understanding is that since as a TC holder they groom you from the beginning, they have greater value, as opposed to a lateral hire who comes from a different culture and jurisdiction, hence, the chances of getting a TC is higher (because they get a more valuable worker).

I'll suggest you to not do LLM unless it is from IVY league from U.S or Oxbridge from London.
The better route if you consider, you can practice as an attorney in California or in case you want to move to London give QSE after practicing here in INDIA for 2-3 years.
Another thing I am suggesting you, to do is signing up for Canadian Practice it is much more easier and you can pass there bar test. However it was take anywhere from 1-2 years for getting a VISA.(after getting PR you can call your parents there too).
However, please be aware you are stepping into unknown terrain, you will be running from post of pillar and you won't be having a great lavish life or so called "wanderlust" feeling for few years as you are an immigrant not a native.

On the Contrary you can to MBA, as it has more to offer than LLM.

Hope you achieve success in life bud.

This is actually true. Even thou its called trollish by this legal platform.

I am a judicial officer.

Most of my colleagues are from traditional law colleges. Even judicial Officers from 2000 to 2020 NLU era are mostly law college students.

I have never seen the top NLU rich/intelligent/prestigious family / royal blood types joining the service. Or it's quite rare.

I am not an NLU product. But I know the nlu trend.

Subordinate Judiciary cannot match the NLU life.

Personally I hate this NLU culture. I am coming from a not so financially good family. Couldn't afford NLU education. I worked a few years under a senior before becoming an officer.

Only students from Lower nlus may go for judicial exams as opportunities are limited. That is why bihar nlu has a lot of judicial Officers from what I heard.

I have seen LLM students from top NLUs joining service of other states like Madhya pradesh. But LLM students in NLus are half as good as their undergraduate batch.

Atleast in the top nlus going for judicial exams are don't by the bottom of the barell [...].

The reason is the (1) lack of opportunities and (2) heavy transfers throughout maharashtra.

There is an exception -

While an average judicial officer in most Indian States is from traditional law college and poor background.

Delhi judicial Officers are from very rich NLU backgrounds. Even in rajasthan you can see rich nlu students becoming judicial officers.

A rich top nlu high clat rank student becoming a magistrate in a rural court would be funny 😁😅

Nlu student may not enjoy small talk in a small court. We find happiness in small things. I have worked in Mumbai too. But rural and urban is very different.

They will bring macbook laptops, big cars and city level English to rural. And advocates and litigants would stare all the time.

Most nlu lawyers have only seen high court and don't know how sub Judiciary works in India.

Hey Guys

I have a good independent practice in Delhi. But my wife has moved to Australia (2 years study and work). It was a long time dream of her, and I supported it whole heartedly. She is in IT sector, and has more opportunities there. I also wish to move to a western country - and Australia was the best option.

We want to be together. And I am going there. No option delaying the inevitable.

I am giving up my 8 years of practice experience in Delhi district courts and my LLB in India. Sadly I am wasting 8+7 is 15 years of my life experience. Now I am making over 12 lakhs per annum, I started out with nothing. My hard work and dedication is the reason I am doing ok. I practice in civil and some criminal matters. I am from a very poor family. And I tried hard and claimed the ladder.

Everything is going to waste

I have to join her and kids atleast by this year. Initial days I am planning to do some jobs for sustenance.

After that I want to practice law in Australia.

My English is not very good.

How do I go about it?

Any Indian lawyers who are in Australia or New Zealand kindly guide in this matter. Would be much obliged forever.

Will my age 37 be an issue?

My LLB marks are very bad. Just pass. Is this an issue?

Is bad LLB marks in India an issue for NCA Canada, New York Bar or potential Australia conversion. Want to know this even though irrelevant.

LLM is very costly - already too much loan because of wife's ms degree. I am thinking of cheap alternatives. I have two children so this is impossible. And I need a job for good life for my family.

Like in Canada is there a shortcut to convert Indian LLB to Australian degree like NCA?

How's the job market for an advocate like me?

What should I do.

1. Law Colleges don't teach THE law.

2. Law isn't a rocket science.

3. Anybody passed out from even a T4 law college but having right contacts can overtake you (T1 passed out) just within a few months.

4. Don't think you know everything, just because you have a law degree. People just don't care.

Some firms have worked hard at creating a pharma - life-science practice. Top of mind- NDA under the leadership of Dr. Milind.
Other top firms have Pharma- MnA mix for helping deals close faster (eg Trilegal and Khaitan has partners who know pharma enough to complete deals faster than others).

For future, I think this area is bound to grow- from pure pharma to healthcare as a space (hospitals, health food, wearable digital devices, assisted living/ old age homes) - our population is expanding and aging and health laws (not just pure pharma/ drugs) will be around.

Hope this helps.

a) gain 3 year PQE in Indian law firm then apply for lateral in a UK firm, if you get through the process they will ask you to pass SQE (they will pay for prep and exam costs) This is a non TC route
b) gain 2 year PQE and pass SQE on your own and then apply to smaller firms directly (have a look at rollonfriday website). This is a non TC route. For general information have a look at https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/career-advice/becoming-a-solicitor/qualifying-from-abroad-to-work-in-england-and-wales
c) Soon after graduation you can do a SQE prep course from University of Law [University of Law was a prep provider like Byju but a couple of years ago they were given degree awarding powers, part of their degree can be done online as well]. They sometime also give you the option to do an integrated masters etc. You will have to still apply for a TC to get the requisite PQE to fully qualify.
d) apply for a conversion course (several unis provide MA conversion course previously known as GDL), then you can apply for the Bar Course and hopefully get a pupillage after that and become a barrister

Do lots of research before you take any decision, do not do standalone LLM unless you are in category (a) above and the firm pays for it.

"11.0 additional incentives -........ In particular, such Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities shall be exempt from all UGC Regulations and other guidelines, notifications and orders of the commission on matters pertaining to the subject areas laid down in Regulations 11.1 to 11.6 of these Regulations...

11.3.2 The Institution of Eminence Deemed to be University shall have complete autonomy in the
appointment of faculty, promotions etc including the autonomy to offer them emoluments and perks
commensurate with their standing as it deems fit."

I might be misreading this, but does the act not say IOE's have complete autonomy with respect to faculty appointment and that they are exempt from all other UGC regulations?

See if you are amongst the toppers or Gold/Silver Medalist in your batch and are from T2 College and if firms come for placements at your college you are almost guaranteed a interview. Also, in my opinion if someone who has given the commitment of remaining amongst the batch toppers for five years is usually already hardworking enough to have a holistic CV. But in my experience at my college students with great GPA were almost always shortlisted for interviews post that I feel it's on the calibre of the candidate.

Not really. In big4, it's merit which decides who's where and not educational qualification. Not saying about personal biases, which would be everywhere. So a good lawyer may be above a decent CA and vice versa.

Coming to litigation, yes, there's a lot of pre-litigation work, like stratagising etc , which determine the course of litigations. The inputs of external counsel are taken when the amounts are big and / or the issue is so complex that it's bound to end up before courts. But big 4s handle the disputes in departments and generally clients insist for lawyers for tribunal and above, though tribunal can be handled by big 4. Even in courts, it's not uncommon to see basic drafts made by the big 4s, which are then settled by the advocate who's going to argue the matter.

Hope this clarifies.

A grand ceremony is underway in New Delhi. K. T. Ramalingam, the Chief Justice of India has just been sworn in as the Acting President of India at the Durbar Hall of the Rashtrapati Bhavan. To the world, it appears like the constitutional machinery was working as expected, although under tremendously bizarre circumstances. The President died of a stroke and the Vice President took up the position of Acting President, but also died two weeks later by a helicopter crash. The Chief Justice has now taken that ominous constitutional position, as the acting head of state.

In a little over two weeks, the country has seen three presidents assume office. There is a lot of chatter and theories everywhere. In the small lanes of Chandi Chowk and in the beer pubs of Bangalore; at the Marina Beach and at the corridors of the Supreme Court. Some believe that the Prime Minister was hatching a grand conspiracy to usurp power; others argue that this a insidious ploy by certain foreign governments or agencies. Another theory is that the Chief Justice is behind this. He had recently presided over a bench which overruled a historic precedent, just a week before the President died. The bench ruled that the parliament has an unlimited and unrestrained power to amend the constitution, that this is the correct implication of Article 368 not falling under ‘law’ as per Article 13, and that only the representative body can determine what the basic structure of the constitution ought to be. Some are suspicious of Ramalingam given how events have progressed. Others do not see any connection and stick to different theories.

All opinions and positions changed when Prime Minister Sashikala Banerjee, whose party commanded a thumping majority in the parliament, moved a resolution in the Lok Sabha the next day. The Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2035 was going to amend over three dozen articles of the Constitution, including its preamble and several of the fundamental rights. “Honourable Speaker”, Banerjee began her speech in a thunderous voice, “we are on the precipice of unprecedented times. We have lost two great leaders who provided incredible service and great leadership to the country. I move this bill in their memory. I am certain they would have appreciated this bill in no small measure. I stand today before this grand house to fulfil the long promises of our forebearers. Many things have gone wrong in this country because we have stuck to European and Western principles and have not followed our own ancient customs, practices, and beliefs. We are a great civilization, one of the finest the world has ever seen, and perhaps the only civilization which has survived the test of time. Some of the early governments hardly bothered to give the importance due to it. More recent governments tried to, but not very well. I stand before you today to fulfil that long commitment and return to the foundation and spirit of which our country has always been based on….”

After an eight-hour incredibly heated session, with a small but a stiff opposition who decried what the government was doing, the Lok Sabha passed the Amending bill. The Rajya Sabha passed it the next day. The President assented on the same day, and the constitution stood amended. Among other things, half of the council of states need not ratify amendments affecting it anymore, the word ‘secular’ is removed from the preamble, so too ‘democratic’ and ‘socialist’. The Preamble now identified the country as a “sovereign republic.” Article 1 removed the word “India”, and it now reads as “Bharat shall be a Union of States.” Article 48 of the Directive Principles, which banned cow slaughter, was moved to Part III as a fundamental right. Article 343 changed the status of Hindi to a national language. Article 351 made Sanskrit the only root for Hindi. Several further changes to the fundamental rights, including added restrictions on freedoms, removal of the right to worship and free exercise of faith clause, and the removal of the word ‘personal liberty’ from the right to life provision. The scope for declaring an emergency is now widened. Along with ‘war’, ‘external aggression’ and ‘armed rebellion’, ‘internal disturbance’ and ‘threat to public order’ have been added as new categories under which Emergency can be proclaimed. Several further changes to the centre-state relations are effectuated.

Demonstrations began in universities and on the roads. Many opposed the amendment on the streets and on digital media and decried that the soul of the country has been ripped apart. Even more took on to the streets to support the amendment and argue that historic wrongs and errors have been rightfully corrected. Television screens blared arguing for and against. With the country jolted, the press chaotic, the intelligentsia puzzled, and the global media unsure, the President and the Prime Minister met at the President’s chambers.

“I didn’t think we will put it off, Sashi”, said Ramalingam. “Of course, we did. I kept telling you to have faith. I know it’s been several years, but you are very impatient” sneered Sashikala. “You have to admit that it was a long shot. When Shastri died… (knock on the door) … come in.” Kiran, the President’s principal secretary walked in. “Sir, the law minister is here” she reported. “Send him in” instructed Ramalingam. As Kiran walked out of the room, Sashi asked Ramalingam, in a rather low tone, “have you told Varun yet?” “No, not yet” he replied.

Varun Awasthi, the Minister of Law and Justice, was a loyal party cadre of the last 35 years. He had served in three central governments earlier and two state governments. Read law from Oxford, called to the Lincoln’s Inn, and having practiced at the Supreme Court for nearly 20 years, he became an advocate-general of the Delhi State Government, and later a solicitor-general, and subsequently an Attorney-General. Known for his keen insight to the law, Varun was a veteran of the judicial system and the politics of government and was known for his intemperate outbursts and candid responses. Sashikala appointed Varun as the Law Minister when she won a landslide victory in the general elections last year. She needed him for the specific task at hand.

“What’s the word, Varun?” queried Ramalingam. “Not good. Several writs challenging the amendment in the Supreme Court. Thakur does not look happy… I think he is considering striking-down” reported Varun. Ramalingam stood up and walked over to the window to his left. He picked up the cigarette pack on the sill, took one out and lit a cigarette. After smoking two puffs without saying a word, while staring out of the window at the central lawns, he looked at Varun and asked, “Thakur is Acting-Chief Justice, correct?” Varun nodded. He took another drag and looked at Sashikala, seated on the couch near him, who gently gave him a nod. “Varun…. What if we appoint Manohar as the next Chief Justice instead? I always hated Thakur, he’s a spineless and lacklustre guy, he will ruin the office and all our efforts!” Varun raised his eyebrows, in partial disbelief, “That will be disastrous. Many others might resign if we supersede.” After another few seconds of silence, Sashikala chimed in, “when we are changing so much, we have to let the old guard go. Those who do not understand our vision should not be allowed to continue, especially in the judiciary.” “That is not what I am here for Sashi” retorted Varun “Yes, I believe in our vision and what we are setting out to achieve…. But you can’t just throw away everyone who disagrees with us. Then someday the people will rise, either by elections or by revolution, and have us deposed and restore the old nonsense. Is that what you want?” Sashikala looked to Ramalingam with a piercing gaze. Ramalingam spoke, in his usual low but authoritative tone, “I think what Sashi meant to say was that we are at such a stage in our mission that we cannot take risks, Varun. Once we establish our vision, things will settle down in due course, but we are still on thin ice. We need to secure our footing.” Varun always looked up to Ramalingam as sagacious, determined, and full of wisdom and historical insight. It was on his insistence that he joined the government. The one person whose counsel Varun finds hard to immediately reject. “I guess… we can appoint Manohar…… but you have will have to speak to him and the other judges.” “I’ll do that” responded Ramalingam, as he stubbed his cigarette. He walked over to his desk, picked up his telephone and pressed on a number. “Kiran, inform Manohar that I want to meet him along with Desai and Panicker tomorrow morning”.

Here is my understanding of the situation:
Mr and Mrs Roy, the promoters, collectively hold 33-ish% in their individual capacities. They hold another 29.18% through RRPR Holdings, a PLC they floated.
VCPL, a subsidiary of AMNL (the media and entertainment arm of the Adani group) had apparently issued a loan to the Roys/NDTV (not clear on this) in 2009, against share warrants convertible into shares in RRPR Holdings. Now, VCPL has opted to convert the warrants into shares of RRPR, giving them control of the holding company and thus a 29.18% stake in NDTV.

Questions:
1. Why do promoters divide their holdings like so, holding a part of the shares individually and a part through PLCs, trusts etc? This is the case even for other companies like Nykaa. Is it for convenience of raising funds through debt by pledging only a part of the shares they hold while safely retaining the shares they hold individually, as was done in this case? Ultimately, doesn't it just come down to the contract? Even if the Roys held the entire 62% in their individual capacities, while signing a loan agreement they could've still just pledged 29.18% of their stake, right? Or am I missing something here?

2. How do share warrants differ from convertible preference shares or convertible debentures (optionally/compulsorily, partially/fully)?

3. Aren't there protection clauses for the promoters in such debt transactions? That the warrants may be converted only under certain circumstances or trigger events (such as missing a payment) or after taking consent or something? The debt just perpetually hangs as the Sword of Damocles over the promoters, that VCPL may any day just decide to convert the warrants and acquire 29.18% stake in NDTV? If that is the case, then isn't it rather foolish of the promoters not to have anticipated this, given the current political climate?

4. Can the takeover be prevented by refinancing the debt NDTV/Roys owe to VCPL? That they obtain the amount from somewhere else and pay it off in one go, thus terminating their obligations and cancelling the share warrants? Is that still an option? Would that have been an option before VCPL opted to convert the warrants?

Thanks in advance!

Hello everyone.
Thank you for your responses. I will just update you guys with what has transpired since the time I put this post up.

Firstly, I am from Mumbai. I am currently working at a small Mumbai based law firm. The above- mentioned amount (4 Lakh p.a.) is what I draw working with the firm currently. I am an A0, working in the corporate department/ with the corporate team of said firm.

The T-1 firm that I had an offer from, rescinded it saying they are on a hiring freeze, and hence will not be able to take me on as an Associate at the moment, but would offer me a three- month assessment internship till then, where if I do well at the end of it, I may be taken on as an a full- time employee.

This was not acceptable to me, and hence I have decided to continue at my current Firm. I will see what happens ahead, but will currently be staying put where I am. The work- life balance and team seems to be decent and my Partner and MP seem to be decent as well.

I do not have any other job offers or any other opportunities available currently in my hand. So I guess leaving something as sure as this, would not be a wise decision on my part.

Do you guys still think I am still making the correct decision? If not, then what would you guys do differently/ what would you recommend I do?

As a recent HNLU grad, I can offer some insight. Yes, there is significant discontentment amongst the students because some advances made during the protest are being rolled back. This is the reason behind the loud expressions on social media, that things in that respect are moving backwards, but where HNLU is sliding back to is still where most other Unis are (in terms of curfew timings).

Other than that, I can honestly say that as an institute, HNLU has progressed very significantly since the protest in terms of placements, LLM offers, moot performances etc.

wow the idea of law students who plagiarise in every project trying to disqualify scholars based on google scholar search is strange. I don't like lists like this at all - part of the reason is to understand what good scholarship looks like is a complicated question. good scholarship is not about publishing 100 rubbish pieces a year. Its about publishing one impactful change-making piece a year, maybe. You go to any elite university in the world- that is what they would encourage.

Anyone who doesn't think Anup isnt a good scholar because he "only " put together one project or only has that many publications is kidding themselves. Anups work is painstaking and difficult and perhaps one of the only legal projects coming out of NLUS that is equal parts rigorous empirical research and equal parts making actual changes in peoples lives. project 39A actually litigates and represents people in prisons. they actually work with state governments to try and move the needle not just on death penalty but also legal aid and prison conditions and things like that. He has clearly done something remarkable with this thing, and if you cant recognise its value because its only one project and not scholarly enough- then that says more about you than about them.

footprint as a scholar has to mean more than how many citations you have. it also means what actually changed because of your work. How many people have read it.

You could try reaching out to the compliance practice. It has gained a lot of prominence these days and is interesting as well. Can't compare actually with a law firm, but honestly someone in tier 1 law firm i know knows a lot lot less than someone with 3-4 years of experience in the compliance domain of a B4. Salary is not comparable, but so is WLB. One is better, one is worse. You choose.

Hi,
So I was in this same position 4 years ago. I'll list down some pros and cons to help you decide.

Pros:
1. Culture- I've encountered some really nice seniors and some faculty who are always ready to guide you and help you out. While there are people from all walks of life, if you proactively make connections, it will be helpful.
2. Mooting Opportunities- There are internal moot eliminations from the first year itself, and based on the rank you secure, you can bid for National and International Competitions. Lot of ADR competition opportunities as well, and college reimburses most mooting related expenses.

3. Alumni Network- I've met several associates and partners who are SLS alums through internships, and it helps to establish a preliminary connection.

4. Library and Database Access- Library has a pretty vast collection, and all students get access to several databases with training for some of them.

5. Co and Extra Curriculars- There is ample stuff that you can take up apart from your academics, through various cells, committees and clubs. Depending on your interests, you can apply to these student bodies.

6. Good Infrastructure- Although the campus(read building) is tiny, the infrastructure provided is relatively better than other colleges.
7. Pune- The city has good weather and the campus is near the airport, and living there is not much of a hassle. If you like partying, this place will not disappoint.

Cons:
1. Poor Administration- The administration is absolutely clueless and inefficient. Scheduling of classes, internals and externals is often done at the 11th hour, and that really hampers students from planning out internships and other things in advance.

2. Tiny Campus- The building is pretty small, and is shared with a couple of other Symbiosis institutions, and hostel facility is available on-campus for only girls, and that too not for all batches.

3. Course Structure and Workload- The academic pressure in the first 3 years is pretty high, with constant assignments, tests and vivas. It is relatively better in the 4th and 5th year, but stress and anxiety shall be your new best friends. This in a twisted way, helps you get ready for the toxic world of law firms.

4. High Fees- The amount of fees has drastically increased in the past 3-4 years, and they didn't reduce the fees during the COVID pandemic either.

Coming to placements, it is a mixed-bag. While the placements for the previous years weren't too great, it has considerably improved this year, with several Tier-1 firms and corporates already having completed their recruitment. There are no guaranteed placements, and that is a constant source of anxiety for many, including me, if you are a decent student academically, and have a well-rounded profile, you should land a decent job.

The faculty too are a mixed bag, with most subjects having a lead faculty, who are very knowledgeable and teach well, but are always accompanied by other faculty members, who are inexperienced, and quite frankly, terrible. The visiting faculty and guest lecturers are usually better thankfully.

Overall, it's definitely a good choice, and you should definitely consider it, if you are not getting into the top 5-6 NLUs.

There's no right answer - it's really pegged to your goals.

Working at a larger firm will fetch you more money and therefore is better for your financial security in the long run. Plus it's always open to you to switch to a smaller firm after a few years with some savings. It could even help you negotiate better money from the smaller firm later.

Plus the exposure you get at a larger firm tends to be better unless you work for specialized and well regarded boutiques.

But if money isn't a concern - both in the short term and the long term, then you can take that out as a factor for your choice.

For exposure as well, not everyone is ambitious and that's fine. Working can be stressful, people are difficult in high stakes environments because they're stressed themselves and you may not really enjoy the work at all.

Working in larger firms is difficult on mental and physical health too - the sheer hours that you spend take away a lot from you. Lack of sleep, lack of exercise is common. And many tend to indulge in junk food, smoking or just consumerism to deal with stress.

Neither is all good and bad - you could take a lower paying job and make fabulous savings and investments. You could take a higher paying job and be successful in putting boundaries and be careful with your health.

So really, it's up to you. You still have a few years to try it out and decide.

Well, if you're not in a tier 1 city and are living in your own house with your family, the expenses come down a lot. Moreover, if you're family is self-sustaining/rich, you'll find that you're living an extremely good life. In T1 cities everything burns money. Be it outings, dates, rent etc. Hence, when you take into account everything, in T1s, many people end up saving very less. Hence the difference of 10LPA is not correct when you take into account the totality of things. There are great T2/T3 cities in India, where the cost of living is laughably minimal, relative to what it costs in a T1. Hence, if there's WLB, then I would happily opt for the 4LPA job for now, provided there's scope for growth. The scope could include various factors like how much are you getting upskilled and how great is the salary offered to the higher-ups etc. Life is not all about money. Satisfaction plays a key role. As does fitness WLB. Hope the OP takes a calculated call on this one and not simply go after the money, in turn sacrificing Mental & Physical well-being, Family Time and Long Drives (btw T1 traffic sucks!).

The struggle to get into a tier 1 is real, man. It's almost impossible unless you know someone at the SA/PA level, who can put in a word and follow up with a partner, not with HR. Especially in disputes, where vacancies are rare.

The other option is to go through recruiters who work with that particular tier 1, but this is less effective than the first method.

Something else that I considered but didn't explore/act on was speaking to tier 1 partners when you see them in Court. This mostly happens in Supreme Court, though, but seeing as you're with an ASG running into them shouldn't be a problem. I know for a fact that JSA/SAM/CAM/KCO partners are usually in SC or HC.

Your practice area is also something to consider. Most tier 1 firms do either commercial/contractual/IBC disputes or white collar crime. Arbitration experience is also almost a necessity. Regulatory work, especially in electricity, helps.

If you have a good equation with your ASG (assuming you're there now), the best way is to ask him to put in a word with one of the partners that frequent SC. If not, try getting in touch with SA/PAs that work at those firms and asking them to push your CV. But good luck, making the switch from a chamber practice to a tier 1 disputes team is surprisingly difficult, even from a very well known chamber.

After graduating from a top NLU, I did my LLM from KCL and UCL, back in the day when they offered joint courses. I certainly benefited from it. Apart from being taught by excellent professors and spending a year enjoying London, I was hired by a well-known MNC on the basis of my specialisation and my degree. I later went into litigation in my specialised field and felt that my degree helped in various ways. I also made helpful contacts during the course and met my eventual wife in London :)

Certainly, LLMs don't matter if your life's ambition is to join CAM after graduation and become a partner there, but not everyone wishes to pursue that path. So I'm sceptical on the repeated negative comments on LI discouraging people to do LLMs abroad, very often by people in their early twenties with very little life experience and no ambition in life beyond working for CAM.

OP, you should have mentioned your home city and the firm+team+city you got the offer from.

Short Answer - Leverage the T1 offer with your current firm, and understand how your pay will grow. Not worth switching to another firm, what you save > what you earn.

Long Answer - my advice is contrary to what most people will say. But here's my take. The very objective for working in a T1 usually revolves around career growth and money.

Firstly, it is a false opinion that one cannot have a successful career unless it is a T1 firm. Sure, the virtue signalling is obvious; having a T1 on one's CV makes one much more employable in the long run. But even then, my personal observation has been that not all teams are alike, and there's a HUGE difference within firms. And even in good teams, the work is pretty clerical. People were managing WFH well in most non-lit teams, even then firms want people back in office to justify billables. So a top firm does not equal forward thinking, it can be the opposite too.

Second is the money. Ask yourself - How much do you earn, versus how much do you save? Upon deep introspection, when you are working in a T1, especially in a big city, savings are difficult. Rent, food and travel take up a lot of money and time. Moreover, the quality of food can also never as good as home cooked food. Health does take a hit. People in their 30s staring at serious ailments, which means more money drained. Work-Life balance is known to be quite terrible. And if you work out your actual hours worked (which can be close to 100 hours in a week) and your monthly take-home, the math might be almost equal to your current gig.

I asked a friend working in a T1 (makes about 1.3 Lacs per month) what they do with the money. The answer was that they spend it on staycations, trips to Goa, or the latest headphones/gadgets. Personally, I found the answer to be quite unsatisfactory. But in cities like Bombay or Delhi, investing in sports/leisure is way too expensive, almost inaccessible.

Best idea is to invest about 90% of your current salary in the broad market. Save like hell. Today you make lesser, but 10 years down the line, you will be in a better financial position than your T1 peers. Mutual Funds, SIPs, actual stocks, bonds - this is the stuff that you can learn and leverage.

Ask yourself if you would prefer to be with your family, and it is perfectly brilliant if you choose that, ignore the capitalist kids here. Speak to your parents. Ask them is the lower earning+high investment plan sounds good.
Thirdly, assess the present job, and tell your employer that you have a better offer, but you would prefer to grow in your present role (other LI members can comment on whether this strategy is logical or not). Take up a side hustle, remotely, but be cautious. And invest in your health heavily - habits now ensure longetivity tomorrow.

Disclosure - I make as much as OP. Am working in a city I was born and raised in. 5 day week.
And I get to go home for a lunch and a nap. I love it, touchwood.

OP: I am 40, so graduated from a law school a generation ago. Things have changed a lot since then (or at least I hope so). A major challenge with gay dating, anything serious, is the small numbers. We are fewer in numbers, so that is a problem in itself. Someone mentioned about boys' hostels. That adds another layer of complication. It can truly be hell. But again that's from my time; I am hoping things are slightly better now. But all that said, certainly explore dating, whether on tinder, bumble or anything else. There may be classmates too and their profiles too might show up on those apps. One downside of law schools in India (or even universities in general) is that there aren't any social LGBT forums/groups. Anyway, certainly explore dating. My biggest regret from my time as a student was that I never bothered with these things only to realize later on that campuses are the best place to find people you might reasonably get along with you. Of course, law schools in India are small communities but it's still worth trying. Good luck

Incase you do end up making the decision on moving to Bangalore- firstly a warm welcome to you!
As with any city, culturally assimilating into the place gives you a better sense of belonging than being a perpetual alien. Would highly suggest that you pick up some basic Kannada at your own pace. Tbvh what's in it for you- you'll get better discounts from vendors, auto drivers, can get along better with locals and other seen and unseen benefits. People are very warm here and you'll be met with a hearty laugh when people hear your Kannada and these aforementioned benefits will be their part of acknowledging your efforts. You always have the choice to not do this and remain alienated by easily saying that you don't know Kannada and impose any other language you know on people. Life will still go on but your experience will be different.

Im a North Indian living in Bangalore. Here are the pros and cons :

Pros:
1. The weather. You won’t realise it now but honestly this is a game changer. You will in general feel happy and less irritable. It is a real upgrade in terms of day to day life because you will enjoy being outdoors.
2. If you live in central Bangalore, the city is walkable. Cubbon park, some of the city’s nicest restaurants and bars would be accessible by foot.
3. Cost of living - rent can be expensive in central blr but it is still comparable to Delhi prices. It’s nothing close to Bombay. Even though you’re not paying rent right now if you’re moving to a start up as a GC I’m sure this isn’t going to cause a huge hole in the pocket or anything.
4. Travel from Bangalore to nearby locations is wonderful.

Cons-
1. Food- cannot be compared to Delhi food. Finding a decent cook who can make North Indian food well will be a challenge but it’s not impossible.
2. Pace of life - things are changing now but moving here was definitely an adjustment for me.
3. Night life - bars at 7pm are buzzing but dead by 11pm - 12am. Weekends are exceptions but even then most places close much earlier than what you’re used to in Delhi. Keep your home bar fully stocked!
4. Traffic traffic traffic- but if you live in central Bangalore and your office isn’t too far this won’t be an issue. If it’s far, be ready for the mad commute.

All in all, I absolutely love living in Bangalore and wouldn’t want to move out of here. You’re not going to face trouble just because you’re from north India. People here are generally laid back - they like their beer and Js and ofcourse there’s the lot who love startup and VC talk. Moving from a Tier 1 to in-house as a GC is going to be a decision you won’t regret. If you do decide to move, welcome aboard!

I am going to give you some hard facts as someone who is a New York qualified lawyer. If you want a shot at very good law school for an LLM, you also need either really great marks or really stellar experience. Your work experience may be good for that (though I don't have the details). For financial aid/scholarships, especially the merit based ones, you need both good grades and good work experience. Good news is, your past institute doesn't matter. But you need recommendations from your past professors. Keep that in mind.
Jobs post LLM are quite competitive and I'm not going to lie - law firms there are very picky about which LLMs they hire. People with past experiences from more transactional practices in big law firms in India tend to get a preference. Networking will be key in the LLM.
However, for the JD, your legal experience and admission to the bar in India may give you an edge in admission. But you need to get a kickass score in LSAT to get a good school and unfortunately your undergrad grades may be considered. But, JDs are expensive. You'll have to take out a loan if you don't get good financial aid.
These are the routes available to you. As for the New York Bar, you need to get your undergrad school to send your transcripts to them for vetting. There is no getting around it.
Anyway that's my two cents for the law.
If you're not too opposed to it, go for an MBA.

Don't rule out silver circle firms like HSF, Macfarlanes, Ashurst - you are getting paid quite neat for the amount of hours put in. By the way, the salary for a fresh Associate at HSF is now more than that at Linklaters. This Magic Circle thing is nearly over as most firms are now staffed on matters that the MC firms used to do exclusively in the past. The peers are also catching up in terms of salaries.

Answer to your question is foreign law firm anyday simply because of the prestige, the brand and the quality of life. Hours same bhi ho tab bhi. It's more about the environment. Atleast angrez hindi me gaali to ni denge, you'll just "piss them off"

Ah a question I can finally answer. When I graduated (around 2015, not revealing exact batch) from a Tier 1 NLU, I had two options, either join an Indian firm (AZB/AMSS) from Day Zero or join a Magic Circle firm. I tried to double-dip, I worked for a year at the Indian firm and joined the following cycle of trainee solicitors at the MC firm. I continued to work in London post qualification, and after a few years there, pivoted back to the same Indian firm as a PA. I am ahead (seniority and pay) of my batch in the firm now. Here's my take.

London is good in that it exposes you to the highest levels of international transactional work. That comes with it, the professionalism that is inevitable - every other person on a transaction, be they a lawyer, an accountant, a consultant, the target, the acquirer, the bank, the press (eg FT coverage) are leagues ahead of their equivalent in India. So that really elevates you. Upon returning, I notice that there is way less of that in India. As a PA, I do business development - so the lack of professionalism I see in the marketplace, clients and so on is very clear. On the other hand, you have way more ownership of the work at my level (than the peers I left behind in London). You do more of the heavy lifting, and are accountable for better results.

Work-life balance, other interests, hobbies and such are not prioritized in the Indian firms. In London, I was able to do marathons and cycle; the firm paid for tennis training, weekends were usually respected and so on. As you can imagine, none of that is given serious consideration in Lower Parel.

Career-mobility is better in India. For what its worth, the glass ceiling in London is quite real. Foreigners take longer (if at all) to make Partner. Unless you bring a lot of business to the firm (top Indian corporate houses, usually through family/community networks), you will stagnate after a point. Alternatively, you have to be completely English in tastes, interests, and so on (I see some degree of affectation being put on by Indian grads just to gel with the old boys' club vibe at the senior levels). I was not cut out for it. I think I made the right decision, since its easier to leave after 5-6 years at a Magic Circle firm to return to India, as opposed to later when one comes across as someone who couldn't cut it in London.

More importantly, money. London pays better in raw terms, but the cost of living is very high. Assuming a comparable lifestyle, you might end up saving less than you'd assume seeing your salary. I think I took the right call by moving to the Home Counties after my trainee-year, and commuting by train. London is very expensive, and frankly I did not enjoy the party lifestyle beyond a point.

On the other hand, the money I make now as a PA in Bombay goes much farther in terms of what it gets me. I can have a car and a driver (so the traffic doesn't bother me), I also have my own flat now. These things would not have been possible in London (till much later, if at all).

So, to freshers, I can suggest this - do London as a long-term career only if you're sure and confident of long-term success. Otherwise, do it for a while (for the exposure) and bring that back to India where it may be valued, plus your life will be better off.

What's with all the downvotes? We've had worse discussions.

I can understand where the OP is coming from. A major part of college is supposed to be the dalliances people have. And a college dalliance, while in no way the peak, is really special in its own way (I mean, from what I could tell on the outside I didn't have one). Living on the same campus, the constant accessibility, it's exciting in its own way. Especially for young kids just out of school. It's a part of the essential college experience for straight people. so they don't give it a second thought I guess.

OP, the situation is kind of underwhelming. I would really, REALLY strongly advise to stay away from Grindr in general. Just a good tip for life. Especially in India. Especially in anything other than a tony area in a T1 city.

Tinder/Bumble should be okay I guess, but don't be too hopeful. From my experience, what I can tell you is that law schools attract a generally okay crowd with a relatively woke bent, so you won't have too much trouble if you do get into a relationship or something. But you will have to be extra careful. (The boys' hostel can be a special tenth circle of hell, but, hopefully, most of them will be just harmless/indifferent).

To answer your main question: gay culture and openly gay folks are unfortunately mostly restricted to T1 cities. I get it, when you're shooting in the dark. But, well, it is what it is.

Also, if you're on a dating app of any kind, please be careful, always talk to the person well before meeting. Meet in a place that is not secluded. And inform someone you trust. There has been a sharp rise in cases where gay men get extorted on these apps.

Take care!

Fudging CVs and Salary slips will lead you to good pain. One candidate when I was interviewing had written a lot on certain type of transactions handled. When some basic questions were put based on this candidate's cv, none of the questions could be answered. Finally I asked the candidate to spell out a particular term even that ended up in a wrong answer. The candidate was from on of the top NLU's and was placed with a Tier 1 firm. The interview was wound up in 20 mins.

Never fudge anything. Be truthful

There are hundreds of students and alumni from all three of those institutions whose English prowess is less than ideal. That does not prevent them from being successful in their respective careers either. Quit treating linguistic excellence as proxy for knowledge or competence in any field.

Friend, looks like you are yet to find your calling, which is understandable at your age. I was in your place about a decade back and I took DU. It is the ideal place to explore varied interests, the day to day is not hectic and you'll be able to get many experiences. I eventually went to DU for LLB but with a sense of purpose and a (somewhat) clear idea of what i wanted out of it. Graduated with a ppo from a tier 1 (DU llb placements are non existent, so this was entirely through grind). Adding that I am a first gen lawyer with no prior family or friend in the field.

There is no point in doing a 5 year specialised degree with no conviction.

Next IAS Monthly magazine or Dristhi , editorials from insight IAS, daily reading from EL CASA or legal discourse or Divya kumar garg ( all telegram channel) , clat post ( legal edge ), few articles from India legal . Take notes of any 2 coaching centres .Read 3 hrs with 30 to 40 page per hr for next 2 months and 5 hrs gk another last 2 months to score within 05- 8 marks from top scorers( which is based on other numerous factors) .

If you think of it as suffering sociology i dont know what to tell you. A masters programme is not for you. Interdisciplinarity doesnt mean you have sociology courses to check a box.it means that that interdisciplinarity is baked into every course you study. So when you study law and justice theres philosophy, when you study research methods theres literally all sorts of methods including sociological ones. When you study competition law youll study economics also.
This is a good thing for the university. You seem to not want to study anything at all and have demonstrated a remarkable lack of intiative , judgment, and curiosity. I would suggest you reflect on why you want to do this degree in the first place. Youre wasting their time with this attitude.

Hahaha it’s difficult to decide at the age of 18 but this is the age when this decision has too taken.

We know that you’re drawn to the idea of being a DU student. But I don’t understand why you want to study Econ at either of these places if it doesn’t interest you. Look at other options. What sparks your interest? And why are you at NLUD if you have a great desire to flee.

Find the thing that you love and see where it takes you. Good luck!!

Thank you, kind stranger, for taking the time out of your very busy life to make the ad hominem attack and let me know that '[i]t really strains credibility' that I am in any sort of teaching position. I appreciate your opinion. Quite valuable indeed and much needed in light of the discussion.

I am so saddened by your anonymous comment on LI that I will throw my LL.M., PhD and postdoc experience from some of the world's top universities, and some stellar student evaluations into the trash and resign immediately because your have opined. I get it, you opine for free, and I appreciate your generosity in providing mankind with this blessing.

For a substantive comment, please see my reply to #3.1.1.A.

https://vahura.com/initiatives/blf

PDF: https://cdn.vahura.com/site/media/docs/download-links/The-Best-Law-Firms-to-Work-For-in-India-2022_2022-08-18-101821_qxiq.pdf



Top 10 in different categories:



Perception scores:



Views???

I'm assuming you want to shift to become an investment banker and not a lawyer for an investment bank.

Your best bet would be to get an MBA and then apply. Assuming you have 2-3 years of CM experience, it'll work in your favour - both for business school applications and post graduation outcomes.

Without it, you can shift to tier-2 and tier-3 investment firms. But do keep in mind that thousands of applicants from engineering and non-IIM MBA schools keep applying to these firms. So going through the standard application process won't yield much. Find a mid-level employee already working at that place - through friends or clients - and get them to refer you. You'll still have to give compelling reasons in the interview though - as to why they should hire someone with no knowledge of finance, quant and business management.

If you're feeling depression, you should see a therapist. It always helps to talk to a professional who will give you good advice on how to communicate with others and more importantly with yourself. You appear to be spiraling and creating a very negative story about yourself in your mind. You have the potential to do things. Don't sell yourself short. It is very easy to do so in an environment like law school.

You also are falling into the trap that law school is the world. It isn't. Try to make some time for yourself and do some stuff outside if you can. If you aren't feeling kinship with people around you, you should just join activities in the city and make social circles there.

Try to be less harsh on yourself. Many people are open to you, but the energy you are emitting would dissaude many people from getting close. Calm down and give yourself a hug.