1.What exactly is the difference with regards to scope of work between disputes team of a full service law firm and litigation chambers? There are so many chambers that practice only commercial litigation and arbitration work in areas like mining construction etc, i.e not much of trial work.

2. If there so major difference in scope of work then why do people go for chamber practice in first place? The pay is significantly lesser. Even boutique firms pay more than chambers and there is a long gestation period of 5+ years. On the other hand working in Disputes team of decent firm can fetch easily 60k and even 1 lac+ also in firms like AZB.

3. Is is more difficult to get into disputes team of firm as compared to other practice areas like M&A , Capital Markets etc because the latter are requires technical knowledge and skills. Every law student is capable of drafting arguments etc but not every student has enough knowledge of Due diligence

4. How can someone make their CV standout is one particularly wishes to work in Disputes team of a firm? Like knowledge of securities law to practice securities litigation which is a niche

Ps. In my opinion freshers at litigation chambers are better at drafting, research etc and more versed with court procedures as compared to freshers at law firms

Firstly, chambers dont pay anything. Even if they pay 15-25k, they'll look for excuses to deduct. And because most of these chambers are one-man shows, there's no accountability. There's no HR, no clerk, no admin, no driver, no receptionist. You'll spend more time doing menial, clerical and logistical work than legal work. Again, small businesses in india should be avoided at all cost.