We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
I have interned at Saikrishna and Associates (including Call-back) as well as Hammurabi and Soloman Partners (including Call-back) and without referrals, all by myself (begging HRs).
I am a final year law student, having no legal background and unfortunately an unknown law college.
Now when it comes to hiring, your Connections will speak louder than your CV. Trust me, no matter if you have exceptional outstanding CV, a mediocre brat having partner referrals will eat up your position. Both of these firms will exploit you in return of free labour but when comes to hiring only candidate with mediocre employability skills with partner referrals get hired.
My advice would be, don't just intern, work on your connections.
Also, when it comes to vacancies, reach out to people on LinkedIn. Reach out to HRs initially, only then intern, don't waste your tine providing free labour.
Above all, idk what is so wrong with current HR. She'll make promises and then she'll completely ghost you.
PS - I've done Internship as well as a call-back internship with Hammurabi and Soloman Partners (without any referral), along with some decent Tier-1 Internships.
I want everything, everywhere but perhaps not all at once. I sometimes don't understand the point to the Tier 1 law firm life. If one wants a conventionally large career, to get married, to have kids, to be around to raise them. How does one do that?
I'm also not sure that doing more years at a T1 law firm will be the way to achieve it (currently at ~6 PQE). The lives of my partners at my firm truly truly scare me, I don't want to wrangle with an SPA at 3 am while my 1 year old is at home, what is the point of putting in all this hard all your 20s and 30s if they still get on calls over Sunday because you can't say no to clients and your child keeps crying in the background?
Might as well do a good in house job and live a normal life right from your 20s? While Tier 1 firms pay well, they will never let you build wealth meaningful enough to let you take it easy when you're 45. Why is everyone doing this? Why are in house jobs not more popular
Such childish behaviour from proff side to impose his ideals on a first year student
the environment is too fragmented, too many PhD tests, some are irregular, some completely opaque, some have changing question pattern
future academics need some stability
A successful DRT/DRAT advocate might make around ₹50 lakhs in annual profit, and some even make ₹2 to ₹3 crore in profit. However, such profits typically come from running a chamber or firm more like a high-volume shop than a traditional advocate’s practice. They employ a large number of juniors, often freshers, who may be paid around ₹8,000 per month in cities like Bombay. That is essentially how many of these practices are run.
These are the points to remember, there are people who have done well from both the places, so you would not be badly off no matter which one you choose.
There is not much to choose between NALSAR and NUJS to be honest right now. Faculty are comparable, so are the VCs now that OVN has replaced NKC at NUJS, placement is close enough to be similar, location-wise NUJS will have advantage over NALSAR. NALSAR had kept its batch strength steady though for some time, so things would be stabler there.
We all have gone through this at some point in our life. I am working in a law firm and can have a chat with you. Mail me if interested on hanish.talsania@pandyajuris.com
Also, another thing I have come to realise is that since Bangalore does not have a lot of good institutes asides, NLS of course and Christ, the competition is already low and the city presenting a natural barrier for outsiders vis-a-vis language and cultural environment, the ones who have accustomed to or are locals have an edge when it comes to the home-grown market. Delhi and Mumbai are already saturated with local college and students flocking from outside cities, meanwhile Bangalore's legal market is still largely pristine and is expected to grown in the future. The only issue is, how to transition there from other cities.
The work itself also isn’t monotonous; almost every day brings something new. While that’s great from a learning perspective, it also means there’s constant pressure to learn quickly, retain a lot of information, and perform immediately. On top of that, it feels like the quality of our work alone no longer speaks for itself, which makes the environment even more pressuring, because you are expected to know. I have covered whole semester worth of portions in one night trying to understand the work.
I also want to be clear that I’m not trying to complain, whine, or sound entitled. I genuinely want to do well here, and I’m trying to understand how to make this environment more manageable for myself without overburdening myself any more than I already am.
I guess what I’m really struggling with is whether this is just part of being early in my career, or if this is something I should expect long-term. Will I always feel this overwhelmed and behind, or does it get better with experience?
For SAM, I remember my friends getting the joining email/offer letter somewhere in April.
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/haryana/row-erupts-at-jindal-varsity-over-comparing-modi-with-hitler/amp
Join the firm, work for a few years and then make the switch to in-house if you do not enjoy the work.
Unfortunately, litigation is perhaps the most exclusive gated profession in the country. Not everyone can start out with 10k salary - I come from a small town and relocating to delhi would literally starve me with that income. Hence, corporate law is my only alternative.
If you're from the 2026 batch, then you haven't experienced being a lawyer. I get your sense of disillusionment - I've been down that road. But here's the thing; law school doesn't (and can't) teach you how to become a lawyer, and it makes little difference how many "professors of practice" have taught you. Realistically, law school can never teach you the realities of the profession, because each practice area in each city in each country will turn out differently. Law school will help you understand basic concepts, and that's pretty much it. Becoming a lawyer is something you start learning the first day on the job and then keep learning till you quit or die - it makes little difference if you're a corporate/transactional lawyer or a litigator. You will have boring days and you'll have riveting, intellectually stimulating ones. You need to learn to plough through both.
The "profession is built around talking jargon and moving documents"? How does that make it any different from other white-collar professions? You're just using different jargon and moving around different pieces of data. That data you're "mechanically" moving around may be stultifying to you, friend, but it means a LOT to your client's commercial or personal prospects. And, for the record, NOBODY talks more jargon and moves around more pointless documents than litigators, since you harbour the impression that litigation involves more skill than a corporate law.
You feel that your friends are more "skilled" because they're finance bros or tech bros? They're not. They just have a different set of skills than you and they're as untrained and inexperienced as you are. Besides, who will they turn to down the line when they want to restructure their businesses, or want advice on navigating new SEBI regulations, or when they're being sued for a breach of non-compete? They're going to turn to you. Your skill is helping these people get out of trouble, or get to where they want with their lives and their businesses. If you help them, they'll come back to you again and again, because they trust you. It's the same reason why most of us prefer to go to the same accountants or doctors or hairdressers - because we trust them with stuff that is personal, sensitive and really important to our well-being. A lawyer's true skill is the trust that they build - with clients, with colleagues, with courts and tribunals.
Is practicing as a corporate lawyer mechanical compared to a litigator? Up to a point, yes. But I know plenty of litigators who got pigeonholed into specific types of disputes who have the same complaint. You want an example of mechanical? Try doing merger/demerger scheme matters year after year and you'll see what 'mechanical' truly means.
I've dealt with all sorts of clients in my two plus decades of practice - startup CEOs not old enough to buy a drink, flash hedge fund managers, algotraders, genius programmers, civil servants, cops - you name it. Many of them would be bankrupt, screwed over by unethical investors or in prison for being frauds or just stupid and overconfident. They're not - because of us, unskilled, banal lawyers.
I started life as a gen corp/M&A lawyer, then did some cap markets, and then became a litigator (which I currently am). One of the reasons I moved to litigation was because I too felt that a corporate/transactional practice was process driven and boring. To my surprise and delight I discovered that my new litigator colleagues, while more familiar with court craft, didn't know how to read financial statements, thought ROFR was a dog's name and were clueless about FEMA other than it existed and the ED could come after you if you violated it. This was a huge disadvantage to them while dealing with a particularly tricky shareholders dispute. So, yes, I got bored with corporate law, but I had learned skills that were (a) not taught in my premier NLU and (b) none of my coworkers had. You see where I'm going with this?
This is somewhat out of context, but I feel this applies to our profession. One of my favourite movie monologues from Margin Call:
"If you want to do this with your life, and do it well, you need to believe that you are necessary. And you are. If people want to live like this...with their big cars and these houses that they haven't even paid for. Then you are necessary. The only reason they can continue to live like kings is because we've got our fingers on the scale in their favor. And if I were to take my finger off...then the whole world gets really fing fair, really fing quickly."
If you still want to get a degree in another discipline, sure, you be you. But remember that you're doing it after spending 5 years studying for a profession you want to ditch before even spending a day practising it. Good luck.
We were working on an advisory for a foreign client and I had done a shit ton of research for the matter. My practice area is smaller and more niche so not a lot of research comes as easily as Gen Corp / disputes.
Turned over the research, sat with my seniors, finalised everything into one doc and got ready to send it to the partner. Started proofreading the doc on a whim right before sending and realised that I had switched the appeal status for two cases with the same party name (one of these was a writ and the other an appeal).
Completely lost my shit because I knew that it had the potential to change our legal opinion (which could take days longer) and hyperventilated for a full hour - finally summoned the courage to message my PA - who promptly got on a call with me - only for both of us to come to the conclusion that it didn’t really impact our assessment and a couple of words had to be changed. Apologised to the PA about 10 times only for them to say it was completely fine, and it caused no issues. Made the change - sent out the doc to partner and subsequently to the client - life went on.
Moral of the story is that fuckups are only as big as we make them out to be (usually).
My anxiety however, continues to pervade my daily work life, and I do check a case status thrice before I open my mouth about it now :p
Your comment about too many NLUs is also correct. When tier 2 IITs and IIMs are struggling with placements, what hope do tier 2 and 3 NLUs have? We should have has no more than 5 NLUs in India, each admitting no more than 100 students per batch.
Looking for a reality check from people here.
I graduated from a national law university and ended up working in the policy space straight out of college. Have been there for ~2.5 years now. Recently decided to move back into core law practice specifically law firms (more specifically general corporate / M&A teams). I’ll skip the “why policy to law” part and "why M&A" part, but this is a conscious and thought-through decision.
Over the last few months, I’ve been preparing from scratch again [Companies Act, FEMA, Contracts, etc.] and also trying to understand the practical side of things [DDs, SPAs, SHAs, BTAs etc.] with active guidance from folks currently working in Tier-1 corporate teams.
I’m realistic about the switch and don’t have expectations of shortcuts. I’m willing to start wherever possible and put in the hours to catch up. My question is mainly this: How do people here see the chances of someone with a policy background transitioning into general corporate/M&A at law firms after ~2-3 years out of “traditional” practice?
Would really appreciate honest views, especially from those who’ve seen similar transitions or work in firms. Happy to hear both encouraging and critical perspectives.
Aren't the clients themselves broke??
True Reds did it earlier, maybe worse, during their time. GOP did it earlier. British did it. Saffron will certainly do it in future. Already doing in UP. They have a sparkling history of doing it earlier.
Now that we have shown that every non Grassroot has done it and will do in future, how does that justify or dignity the inabe rationale of Madam
Do they have a specific criterion for selection? Do they prefer that you do a regular internship first and then subsequently an assessment, or can you apply for an assessment directly? Are there any preferred months for which I should apply for an assessment?
Is the duration for the assessment a month or more?
Is applying through the website enough, or do you have to send emails as well?
Overall, any info/tips for the application or anyone who can share some experience from the office... Thanks a lot to anyone who can help me out!!!
someone replyyy
AZB- Anand
Trilegal- Kannan
You might be better suited to become an artist, cook, inventor, potter, lab scientist or may choose an MBA and open a business (since working as an HR or Consultant won't yield a tangible work product either) :)
First, reservations across various categories.
Second, the indiscriminate establishment of an NLU in almost every state. Maharashtra alone has two National Law Universities. When a “national” university exists in every state, the inevitable consequence is a dilution of standards across institutions, as talent is spread too thinly.
Further, private institutions such as Jindal Global Law School offer highly competitive pay packages to qualified professionals who are inclined to teach. This has drawn serious academic talent away from public universities and has further contributed to the decline in their standards.
I foresee a market-driven consolidation and correction in the years to come. These universities have produced a glut of attorneys, the vast majority of whom are underutilised due to a lack of good-quality, well-paying work. Most such work remains concentrated in Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, and Hyderabad, and is largely cornered by established law firms or senior practitioners breaking away from them.
A significant number of graduates are unable to secure law-firm or in-house roles. Instead, they are pushed into:
(a) lower-court litigation with fewer matters—an area particularly vulnerable to being disrupted or replaced by AI; or
(b) outsourced paralegal or secretarial work from the UK and the USA, often after spending considerable sums to qualify in those jurisdictions.
Only a very small fraction eventually secure quality law-firm or in-house roles overseas.
All told, we have produced—and continue to produce—far more lawyers than even tomorrow’s India will realistically need. There is no clear North Star, except the illusion of a high-paying starting salary of ₹1 lakh per month and the distant dream of becoming a partner earning ₹1 crore per annum.
Following one’s passion and succeeding monetarily is realistically possible only for a small elite—graduates from schools like Doon or Mayo—those with generational wealth to cushion risk and failure.
The overall situation is a mess.
With AI, corporate lawyers are staring at an extinction-level event.
They remain blissfully unaware.
Is there any remote comparison?
NLS is a hundred miles ahead. Compare Faculty. Nalsar and NLUD combined can’t match NLS alone. Compare VC - Rao of Nalsar and Bajpai of NLUD stand nowhere close to Sudhir. Compare alumni, both Nalsar and NLUD together can’t match or come anywhere close to NLS. Only a foolish person will leave NLS to join Nalsar. Whether it’s LLM , PhD or BALLB
The work assigned was either irrelevant to learning or completely unorganized. There was no mentorship, no feedback, and no professional development. Basic professionalism was missing, and the office environment felt stressful and demotivating.
I would strongly not recommend this firm to students who actually want to learn and grow. It is a waste of time and energy if you are looking for real internship exposure.
https://www.wionews.com/india-news/does-marriage-mean-lower-taxes-modi-government-may-offer-major-tax-relief-to-married-couples-in-upcoming-budget-1768831374142/amp
After IB, aspirations continue. People either want to study abroad, or at universities like Ashoka or Jindal. This is a sea change from before, when people from elite families aspired to get into IIT, IIM, NLSIU etc. Nowadays, they are just not interested. Even if a kid is very bright, he or she would rather aim for a good engineering degree in a top 50 US University over even a top 3 IIT.
Won’t this eventually harm NLUs?
law firms draft, file, defend and argue and most importantly strategise and some also argue. Very often, the biggest of the senior counsel fail in strategy. Most law firms today handle statutory tribunals and arbitrations matters in house which is also great legal work and “shaping the law”.
On the corporate side - If law firms did clerical stuff, then why are the biggest PEs and MNCs going to the top firms instead of letting a senior counsel’s clerks or office handle it.
It is only unfortunate that law firm lawyers don’t get the recognition and “senior counsel” gown that they equally deserve.
2. A few months later, I issued a CP Completion certificate to investors even though one of the CP was not completed. Informed my senior about this and he panicked a lot after learning about this blunder. We soon contacted the Company Rep to issue us the completely executed document which was the missing CP. Resent the CP Completion email. No one said anything and we never discussed about this mess I created.