Completely lacks empathy towards students. Has actually physicality assaulted a student too. R, this is an incident on record, you can get it from LI archives itself, so don't censor it. She knows her subject well, but a teacher without empathy and understanding for students will never be a good teacher. Let's face it, why will you hate a teacher otherwise if she's taught you well and treated you fairly, especially even after you graduate?

I am not from NUJS, so I don't know the teacher in question. However, Rai has been one of my teachers. I can say that he has been strict and occasionally irritable, but always fair and never sarcastic or cruel. He has also helped me outside class with my queries, even basic ones, and never given me any impression that he wants anything other than to help me learn.

Hard disagree.

Droning on about the law in such black and white terms and then the god damn rules which we really don't need to learn about in Uni doesn't really make him great.
He had a fantastic opportunity to teach us about the practicality of the subject it was so damn dry.

Dunno, man. He covers the basics pretty well, at least he did with my batch. Only when students show that they have understood it can advance things be discussed. I realised that when I talked with him personally with corp related stuff issues and some assignments that I had for my internship. He definitely knows how to solve corp problems and explain those. I liked his exam paper too, that and labour were the two most challenging exams that I had back then. You may have had a different experience, I am not contesting that. One thing I have learnt after having left law school, doing some work, and then doing my Masters: we genuinely put very little effort during our undergrad law days in classroom and out of it. Couple of teachers used to say the same thing and I personally did not believe that at that time. They weren't too far off the mark though. For my Masters, we needed to study literally hundreds of pages before every class and only then could we have fruitful discussions. Every time I would miss out on advanced prep, I couldn't make much sense of the classroom discussions. Compared to my undergrad days, that was a huge change.

I'm not sure what has been taught to you in your classes, but the Rules and Regulations are usually where the practical aspects of applying the law actually reside. As a recruiter, I will be glad to get interns or freshers who have got a firm grasp of the fundamental concepts, and it will be a bonus if they have got some appreciation for the procedural elements too.

The same thing that makes this forum discuss the mistakes and attitude of anyone else. The student council is for things that are being done now and for current students only. Why are you getting so defensive? Nobody has actually disputed what has been said, because it's all true. The concerned teacher's domain knowledge as well as her adversarial relationship with her students. Only people who have got something to hide need to be wary of the truth coming out.

I have been taught Corporate Law by two people during my time at NUJS. Both had been alum. Shouvik Guha and Kumarjit Ray. First one was good and patient, also very helpful outside class about law school life in general. Second one was good too with top industry rep from what I know, but was a little too aloof and cold for my liking. Learnt a lot from both though TBH, and it genuinely helped in my internship and recruitment later, can't dispute that. There had also been another person, Anuradha Roychowdhury. She was young, but good with theoretical stuff too. Wish we had halfway decent people for Securities Law, Insurance, PE, FEMA, things like that in my time. I had also taken some classes from AK Rai who is at NLUD these days, quite knowledgeable insofar as my experience goes.

Both Kumarjit and Anuradha have both left NUJS years ago. Both were great at corp law. Kumarjit sir's pace of teaching and readings were certainly the most intense course I had to face. Each class covered a lot and missing even one was very stressful to make up. My Tier 1 job demands actually feel less than my corp law exams IMO.

I have been taught by all three and am now working as an SA at a Big Law firm. When I look back at my Corp Law days Kumarjit sir's course was certainly the most rigorous and demanding with 30-50 pages of pre class reading at a minimum that we had to read in order to make sense of the class. The exams were also very strenuous and the questions were MUCH harder to address than the queries I get from my aggressive clients at the firm where I am sweating now. Shouvik Sir was younger and more relatable and very much informal in comparison. His course (Corp I) was pretty standard and he dumbed it down substantially at the cost of missing advanced topics. Unlike KR and SG, Anuradha was inexperienced and had very less practical experience so her classes were like readouts of textbooks and she never really cared either for students or the subject.

I'm sure she's good, probably a practising person hence the focus on practical stuff. But it is quite different to take 4 classes a month and focus on practical and cool stuff, compared to teaching a full course for the whole sem, with a bunch of students who aren't really interested in theory much, but will love to do practical stuff. The challenges are completely different in the two cases.

She teaches regular corp only. Our course is structured as one class a week. While teaching the theory she really connects with how it is applicable in actual practice and also refers to resources which one needs to use / rely on in day to day practice. But I agree - its different from the general type of teaching.

Anwesha Pal & Sujata Roy at NUJS. They set theoretical question papers, take presentations and discuss case laws. Everyone scores 75+ in their subjects. They teach Corporate law, securiries law, banking law, NI act, Insurance law, investment law etc. Students fight to take their electives.

Dr. Balakrishnan K. at NUALS (Contract Law). He is one of the best senior faculty in the country for the same. He is a master of the Socratic Method and Case Study Method. He's an associate professor with decades of experience and knows the subject in and out. He's slightly old school, kind of like those ivy-league senior professors you see in movies/tv; but it works well. He also has a solid base in jurisprudence and that is a bonus element to his lectures.

Ravindra Kumar Singh (GNLU) is a great professor and an authority in the field of Advanced Contracts. However, he is not the most student friendly professor.

Mamta Biswal is v knowledgeable but can bore even the most enthu first years into giving up on Corp Law with Drab procedure.

Stop fooling yourself and others. She is a very resourceful faculty, but in terms of teaching, she is below average. I remember she had asked a senior TA from our college to teach the basics of IBC, and when the senior left the college (cause of graduation), the entire batch was made to do a presentation on one section; that way she covered the portion.

In her words, "me bhi tumhare sath sath ibc sikhungi," as if we are paying such hefty fees to make her learn ibc