Nothing great on substance. Judges eye visibility for post retirement arbitrator appointments. Organising committee is another jamboree- same senior counsel and lawyers control who gets to be a part of the organising committee and who speaks what. You scratch my back and I scratch yours is very prevalent in this coterie. Foreign firms use this for visibility but the actual practising arbitration lawyers don’t really bother.

JGLS students are no longer allowed to take more than 1 class off for Moot Courts. The previous policy allowed 3 days leave for memorial submission, and then leave for travel and the same. Mind you, the same applies for international moot courts, i.e. 1 leave per subject. How is this asking students to take their education seriously? The funding for the moot courts has also gone down, which used to be one of the biggest reasons to join JGLS. You pay exorbitant fees, but you get fully funded Moot Courts.

How are people supposed to do an assessment internship? (The student council is arguing heavily on this and should be changed, hopefully).

The marking scheme is being changed heavily; however, no consultation of the student base has been done in any manner. With more than 13 sections in a batch, the fluctuation of CGPA differing from classroom to classroom has been an issue. Some professors give inflated marks hoping to get good feedback (tlfq review), while other professors refuse to give anyone a perfect grade, believing it to be against their policy. This has led to CGPA becoming meaningless as a matter of comparison.

This problem is not present in NLU becuase of its small batch size but increasingly prominent in JGLS. DJ's solution? Bell Curve... Now you will see 6 students ONLY can get perfect grade while everyone else gets A+ for the good

Prof. Mohan Gopal’s remarks – https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/justice-chandrachuds-comments-could-be-ground-to-file-curative-petition-against-ayodhya-judgment-professor-mohan-gopal-305529

My hot take: Justice D.Y. Chandrachud was neither reckless nor out of line - https://youtu.be/vOKMaOhc_5E

To claim otherwise is the intellectual equivalent of throwing mud in a monsoon—messy, pointless, and revealing of the thrower. Where I’d fault him is in choosing his interlocutors: engaging with click-bait artists is like pouring champagne into a gutter.

What really rankles the self-styled custodians of “secular harmony” is that the SC Constitution Bench led by Justice Chandrachud has punctured their balloon of duplicity. For decades, a cynical lobby fattened itself by keeping Ayodhya as a festering sore—an ATM for appeasement politics and an annuity for electoral blackmail. Now that a definitive judgment has cauterised the wound, they’re sulking like pickpockets deprived of a crowded bazaar.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about constitutional niceties, it’s about the collapse of a cottage industry built on permanent discord. And the tragedy for these merchants of misery is that, this time, the shop has shut for good.

So take more of it..,..,

Genz or whoever the fresh entrants are have a problem with “practice”. It takes time to learn something and acquire a skill which they have no patience to do. Since they want things faster they will probably leave the race, or end up doing things like fraudulent stuff more easily just get that A1 life!

I am very infuriated everytime I see people encouraging litigation. How can anyone who doesn't want to or cannot live on their Baap Ka Maal, earn a decent salary in litigation where the maximum amount these lawyers can pay is mere 20k aka the industry standard. Honestly it feels so unfair to spend 10lakhs in law school to not even get 6LPA

Lmfao, funny how I read this and knew everything was 100% true because it matches with my experience 100%, I hope this comment helps prevent this comment from being taken down because the Tatva Legally India manager flags it as contested and cries about the truth.

If that person actually does flag this and try to censor it like every other comment on how difficult t▮▮▮he ▮▮▮ please give the interns and students a chance to share their voice rather than running afraid from their legally india manager.

LNL was seperated with SP because owner of LNL used to remain at foreign location the whole time. Also because equity was locked with RKL. This equity was called 'dead-equity' by the very owner of SP, due to which SP was created.

Now as Legally India fraternity, we ask MS - Whether the person holding equity along with you, and is also a female partner (Gitunjuli Sharaf) - will abide by this policy?

If not, why she has a cabin next to you. Is this how a professional firm built?

Also, have the shame and decency to announce the bonus and increments on time before sending such bs emails.

An (entry) equity partner at Indian law firm makes less money than a Senior Associate at a foreign law firm. Also, whether a salaries partner at Indian law firm is actually a partner or a glorified PA (we can debate about this but everyone knows).

If Partner tag is important for you, then yes please stay in India but if excellence, exposure, learning and real time growth is important, then there is no doubt.

That’s generally the case with most in-house roles. Annual appraisals usually range between 10–15%, and if you’re already on a higher pay scale, it’s typically around 10%. The upside, however, is that by switching roles every 3–4 years, you can secure a 25–30% hike with each move.

Not everyone is looking to hire all the time. If you approach someone through a reference, they may sit down with you or speak with you on the phone as a favour to the person giving the reference. This does not mean that they are looking to hire someone at that moment. So really, you need to do a few of these interviews before you find someone who likes you and is looking to hire at the time. My advice would also be to ask the person who you interview you with for feedback or if they can possibly refer you to some other person who may be hireing.

There are definitely some good things about working in a law firm. The pay is steady, especially compared to starting out in litigation. At a young age, you can be financially independent and even support your family if needed. The learning in corporate law is structured—you get trained in processes, drafting styles, and deal management in a way that’s systematic. Exposure to big-ticket transactions is real—you may work on billion-dollar M&A, financing, or tech deals that shape industries. The network you build in firms—clients, foreign counsel, partners—can be valuable if you ever branch out later. The brand name of a top-tier firm on your CV can open doors globally, even if you decide to shift careers. That said, the drawbacks are equally real. At the end of the day, the work in most teams is repetitive—document review, diligence, mark-ups, and compliance drafting. Even negotiations, once the novelty wears off, follow a template. You are executing deals, but not really shaping the law or creating anything uniquely your own. Then comes the lifestyle. A 10- to 12-hour day is normal, nights and weekends often get swallowed, and boundaries are blurred. The pay is the justification, but it comes at the cost of health, time, and sometimes even personality. Many corporate lawyers will tell you they didn’t “choose” this life as much as got used to it, because the money made them too weary to imagine something else. And beyond the hours and the monotony, there’s also the fact that in firms, your name rarely matters. The credit sits with the firm or the partner. Even if you’ve slogged on a deal for weeks, no one outside will know your contribution. It’s a career path that gives financial stability but doesn’t necessarily give personal recognition.

Litigation, on the other hand, is a different kind of life. The money doesn’t come immediately, but the work is real, dynamic, and your own. You’re not boxed into clerical tasks—you draft, argue, interact with clients, and solve problems head-on. Every brief is new, every courtroom exchange is different, and every appearance builds your skills. You’re tested daily, not by the length of your working hours, but by the strength of your preparation and arguments. Most importantly, in litigation you build your own name. Clients come to you for your reputation, not to a firm logo. Over time, the financial rewards surpass what most corporate lawyers will see, but beyond the money, there’s the thrill, the independence, and the sense of ownership over your career. For anyone who can afford to invest two to three years in building a practice, litigation offers not just a job but a profession in the truest sense.

Your SA was absolutely correct. You see there are a few mistakes your SA made, and principally, two of them - one, to join a law firm, regardless if its a T1 or not, and second, to choose to continue there. Working at a law firm does not affect your skill sets at all - they remain stagnant, and you end up in an endless loop of doing the same work again and again. To choose to continue there - where you have to ask for leaves, have people to report to, be in a desk job, call yourself an "employee", doing a "job" after having done a professional course is nothing but sheer stupidity. Law is a very difficult profession, and the saying goes correctly - law is a jealous mistress. You make choices in life on the basis of the situation you are in. Say, you got really bad CLAT rank and have to choose between a T3 NLU or a private law college. You take a call on the basis of the situation you are in. The SA here made the mistake most bright people do - to work in a law firm knowing fully well that their career would stagnate in 10 years. They'll either be thrown out or continue to do the same thing again and again. Do litigation, you'll only face issues w money in the first few years, but thereafter the sky is the limit - you will be in a profession, you will be your own boss, and can charge as much as you want and work whenever you want while actually applying your mind.

You did the correct thing. Please brace yourself for two things - one, the lesser pay in the initial years as compared to the law firm counterparts, and second, the success that you will have after a few years.

Litigation is not so rewarding in its intial years, but as has been said and proved time and again, it is much more intellectually rewarding, makes you well known in social circles, and gives you complete independence - everything that a corporate law firm does not provide, and where your career and skills would have stagnated because of the clerical nature of the work there.

This is nothing. I have seen several such policies in other firms in metropolitan cities, both the good ones and the bad ones. It only shows that these firms are nothing and will suck your blood for nothing - no career growth and nothing to reward you other than money - with no way to grow up. This is why litigation is much better - real work is done there and there is no concept of leaves - everyone is their own boss and can leave work and take a vacation whenever they want

Hi, people of LI. I have secured an internship at this firm, but it will require me to relocate for a month. Can anyone tell me about the firm? I know it is a good firm for M&A/PE/VC. But any additional information would be useful, as well as their hiring prospects. Thank you!

I recently interned for a well known DRT, DRAT lawyer in Mumbai. What I wanted to know was how much money could a lawyer starting in the field could hope to make. To the best of my knowledge, the practice is heavily dependant on getting yourself empanelled with various PSBs and playing the volume game well while managing costs by hiring relativity junior lawyers.

Hi all,

I got my LLB degree in 2018 and an LLM in 2019. I have worked in various capacities since then - litigation, legal journalist, in house role, law firm and also as a knowledge manager. None of them have been satisfying - sometimes its the boss, sometimes it's the team, sometimes work culture. Money has been a constant source of disappointment too. At my current job, its all 4. I think its time that i quit law. But I cannot figure out what to do next. Any guidance would be appreciated.

The reason is that your interviews are not going as well as you think. If I were to make a suggestion, it would be to request your interviewer to give you feedback after the process is over. Most of them will be happy to have a chat and you will have a better understanding of where you stand.

What even is the discretionary bonus. Inse yearly bonus toh time par diya nahi jaa raha.

Yahaan yearly bonus bhi discretionary hi hai. It is the owners discretion when the bonus is to be released and how much is to be released. Billing, partners' recommendations, your hardwork, nothing matters

Posting this comment as a prime example of why such comments are trollish.

1. Calling mods 'snowflake' is not a bona fide attempt to engage in discussion.

2. Please learn constitutional law: the government has a duty to you to protect your right of free speech, internet platforms or people's living rooms have no such duty to you.

3. You are constantly posting spam about law firms being places to do clerical work and only litigation being real law. We get it, you really do believe so and have reasons for it, but it's not what the person has asked and is a trollish attempt to derail a thread.

Partners need Associates and therefore they are not hired to fire. Lawyers work in high pressure situations so if you are the one who understands where is the senior coming from and deliver what you are expected to do, imo you will not find ppl toxic unless they use abusive language or yell.

The PAs in this team leave because the existing partners are surviving on existing book and there is no scope of growth. In last 4 years, at least 7-8 PA level and 5-6 SA level people have left the team. Just facts for anyone arrive at conclusion and these facts can be easily confirmed.

No one really knows what is going on except maybe Nishithbhai and NaiDA. The mass hiring is to make up for the exits at a mid and senior level. Personally do not think the firm will shut down anytime soon but its performance will continue declining until it eventually loses what is left of its reputation and becomes just another firm in the system.

I'm a Jindal alumnus who graduated 6+ years ago. Problems have always been there, but with DJ as the Exec Dean, this was bound to happen. She has a very, well, let's just say 'different' way of looking at things - which mostly tend to be very authoritarian, contrary to whatever she may preach in class. Look at what she had done to the previousy-very-successful legal aid clinic. Not surprised at all, just disappointed at my alma mater.

No.

Getting a job in a magic circle or AM 100 firm feels like a dream. But these days if you are really competent in a decade or less you can make partner at a tier 1 law firm in India.

It's far more difficult to make partner at an US or UK based firm than in India. Indian legal market is about to become even bigger (along with the country's GDP) Western Economies and law firms are already running at full capacity.

To Law Graduates who have access to their Alma-mater University/Law College-paid resources like Manupatra, SCC and prestigious international/national journals and magazines,

1. Our Uni Admin is of the view that Alumni shouldn't be provided access as their contract with such platforms is for educational purposes and thus they get a discount which can't be extended to the ones who've long since graduated. The underlying reason is also that it would be a massive expenditure for our Uni.

2. So, is there a solution to this problem? How did your Law School figure out a way to provide you guys access?

3. I know that most of the firms do have subscriptions to these platforms. But, for a graduate opting to litigate, it'd be a boon to have such an access.

There's no need to. You are doing well where you are. Give it another 5 years - and you'll be independent and having clients. In 10-15 years, you';d have grown successful. In 20-30 years, you would be outearning the people of your level where you want to switch. Just give it some time. You'll be thankful that you did not jump to a clerical sector.

Ive been researching a lot about non-litigation roles for lawyers, especially in the finance sector, and it’s been tough to find proper info especially around salary in india

i’m trying to understand what kind of pay and qualifications are needed for legal roles in places like investment banks, mncs, fintechs, pe/vc firms, consulting companies etc (not law firms)

also wondering if there are any other sectors where lawyers can get well-paying non-lit roles, even as freshers

if anyone here has insights or has worked in these spaces, would really appreciate your guidance!

Its so funny that people who come and bark and say that corporate law firms are better than litigation because there's merit in law firms and litigation stenches of nepotism fail to realise that most of the law firms are family run. They have nepotism there as well. These delusional people fail to realise that law firms fail to offer any growth opportunity - any thing real. Yet they want to go and work there.

While DRT/DRAT/NLCT/NCLAT practice is much rewarding in terms of money, and the relative ease in it, there are two key factors which you must consider - first, the restrictive scope within which these tribunals operate, and second, the tag of becoming a tribunal lawyer. On the first, these Tribunals are limited in their scope and you'd be limited by the same. Second, whether we like it or not, there are hierarchies in lawyers - seniors in SC, then perhaps others of SC, then seniors of HC, where some HCs are considered better than others, then others of HCs, then district court lawyers. Tribunal lawyers, despite their earnings and wealth in knowledge, would always be lower in that hierarchy - and their senior designation can be affected too.

Why don't you go work in litigation? Why do you want to work in a law firm? I don't understand - if you are 2024 graduate, its already more than a year. You claim to have worked for a year and left because it was toxic. Do you think any other law firm, whether T1 or T77 would be any less toxic or the nature of the work would be the same. On the issue of connections, when you have connections, why, for the sake of yourself, go through the torment of working in a firm where you'll be a slave? Why not go for litigation where atleast you'll be your own boss? Goes beyond me.

It's okay, don't worry. There are a few ways you can deal with this:

1. Talk to the professors you are close to, or those who are known to be helpful to students. They can guide you on how to deal with the situation.
2. If you had any medical leaves/leaves for competitions, etc., they should be considered, and again, talk to the department concerned for the same.
3. Take a backlog this time, and realise what you have done. Next time onwards, start to attend classes instead of missing them for no reason at all.

God knows. As far as I have used these two, it was not helpful at all [used for research in disputes]. As for a PE/VC team concerned, which would primarily be focused on more nuanced document review and DD work, where there is no requirement of any strategy, I believe the AI platforms you mentioned should be able to work. After all, they can do these clerical work with ease.

It's honestly sad and laughable that you want to know the package in a category of work that you are looking forward to. There cannot be a term called package in a profession. With the advent of the NLUs and the law firms, the unfortunate non-achieval of the goals of NLUs have deroded this culture and profession of law. Today people want to know packages and salary as if it is some kind of a job - it isn't. And if it is, you are just selling yourself to a firm where you can never grow and be someone independent.

You use the term "job". In law, there are no jobs. Its a profession. It is sad to see that people are today having such an incorrect notion about this. Much has been said about the growth trajectory (the lack thereof, ie) in law firms. In a smaller city like Pune which does not have a HC, it's even more prevalent. Those who seek to be in firms, are only gonna suffer much later.

UPDATE - OP here, I did not want to lie, I formally refused my PPO offer. Will be joining the chambers. I am thank full to all the advice, but I feel till the time I have that tier 1 offer as a back up Ill never truly be able to invest a 100% in this thing.

Now I have no option but to make this work. I have seen the struggle and hard work associates put in a Law firm, if I put that in something I find more interesting, It has to work right? I sound naive - but somehow I feel this is it for me.

Thank you for your genuine answer, Samaritan. I am also of the same opinion. Even considering working here for 5-6 years before a shift seems suicidal. I can't fathom the amount of life I will lose in the process. There would be nothing left at the end of the tunnel. It surely is for people who really enjoy template work.

Stay on top of things, DAW happens each year - for next year keep an eye out for event dates in advance. Do some basic diligence, connect with the right ppl on LinkedIn, stay active on lawyers WhatsApp groups, engage actively in the community, a lot of these events dont have entry barriers as such, being proactive is the key!

My limited understanding is that not all references are the same. A few years ago, I faced a similar situation, dint have too much approach, but whatever limited contacts I had, landed me two interviews with tier 1 teams and they did not convert. My sense is that for a reference to really result is an offer letter, the reference has to be solid, there has to be an actual requirement for a resource in the team, the timing of things has to also workout- for instance, it should not be that the team is going through a phase of low volume of work etc., they should of course at some level like you/your profile, it also really helps if this reference via which you have approached the firm, can be of some use to the firm later on (its all quid pro quo really) - law firm partners are smart they are generally able to assess your closeness to your reference - also matters how influential is this reference, is it a siting judge before whom the firm regularly appears or is it some lesser known former judge with whom the firm may not necessarily cross paths and may be of lil to no use to the firm in terms or contacts and favours etc. There is a very fine difference, things like personal terms with the hiring partner etc. also matter, it could be a variety of factors, I am just stating a few. But most of all I think it’s about the timing!

As regards to your fear of negative feedback from your previous team, this is less likely, normally ppl don’t go on to actively damage a freshers career like that. There may be a few exceptions to this, but mostly negative feedback from a previous employer would only come if you really did something grave - unethical/unprofessional, minor issues with competence, availability etc. are generally overlooked and forgiven as long as you dont have a reputation for being a ticking bomb.

I joined a Tier 1 law firm last year and I am part of a very large team with six partners. I mostly report to one salaried partner who made partner about two years ago. Since the day I joined he has shown zero interest in training me. I do understand that with the workload and deadlines it is not always possible to sit down and teach, but in my case it has been absolute neglect. I keep asking him for feedback on how I can improve and it seems like i am expected to figure it out from the redline of my drafts?! the problem is whenever I make a mistake it is never pointed out directly to me. Instead it somehow gets discussed among the partners and the feedback spreads internally, but no one actually addresses it with me. So I do not even know what exactly I did wrong or how to avoid it the next time.

What is getting worse is that this partner has started throwing me under the bus in very subtle ways. For eg in one recent matter there was a non technical issue around the execution of an engagement letter and in the team group chat it was said that as the junior most I should have flagged it. The truth is I had no idea that this was something to even be flagged because with my limited experience I do not yet know the practical implications of that. Instead of guiding me he just lets it look like I messed up. This was just one example but it keeps happening. He never speaks to me about it directly.

He is passive aggressive, gives bad feedback behind my back, does not correct me, and never takes the time to guide me. I want to learn and I am open to feedback, but it feels like I am constantly set up to fail. Has anyone been in a similar situation??

Hi, can someone pls tell me how much time Toer- I law firms take to tell candidates that they have been accepted or rejected. I am aware that they do ghost often but let's keep that aside for now.

For instance, if I applied in August for an internship at SAM for May next year then by when can I expect any sort of reply?

I am a final-year law student from a tier-2, non-NLU background. Over the last few years, I have completed internships at firms such as Dentons Link Legal, Hammurabi & Solomon Partners, and a few boutique firms with highly experienced teams and diverse client work in General Corporate and allied areas. One of these boutiques even extended a call-back offer based on performance, which reinforced my confidence in this practice area.

Looking ahead, I am also scheduled to intern with Saikrishna & Associates (▮▮▮ ▮▮▮) and King Stubb & Kasiva (▮▮▮ ▮▮▮), and I am targeting more opportunities in January 2026 with both large firms and boutique practices. All of my internships so far have been secured through merit and performance-based selections, without institutional support from college.

My interest lies in General Corporate, and I am seeking advice on the following:

1. How should I navigate my upcoming internships to make them impactful and possibly convert them into long-term opportunities?

2. What should I focus on in terms of preparation and skill-building to build a career in General Corporate?

3. For assessment internships or interviews, what key areas (laws, skills, or case studies) should I study to stand out during evaluations?

Any guidance from seniors and practitioners would be invaluable.