mostly its the ranks and internships. Nobody cares about moots but partners and seniors usually take interest in A0s and interns who have stellar publications since nuances of legal opinions for client deliverables and knowledge management ultimately need a good hold on the choice of words and fluency with black letter law.

So, marks (wont matter during lateral hiring) > Internships > Publications/Int moots > Other moots

Note: moots don't hold weight if its a mere participation; either you win or you lose.

Best of luck friend!

I don't understand why should marks matter? There is no standard process of examination among all universities. Some unis may be more lenient while setting the question papers and giving marks so the CGPA of two students (assuming both are equally good at work) who are being assessed for PPO from different universities will differ. Its still fine for campus placements.

If you're looking purely at corp law firms for placements then you are probably making a mistake if you focus solely on moots. Your CV is about creating a conversation and there is very little you can convey to someone sitting in a corp firm even with a great citation at a moot like the Jessup which is a PIL moot. On the contrary a good peer reviewed publication or for that matter several good publications in reputed blogs in one or more of the commercial laws that you will end up utilising with will make your CV more relatable to the reader in a corp firm and will indicate an interest in these subjects beyond your college and exams.

That is not to say that moots do not matter. SOME of the reputed moots are extremely rewarding academic exercises which force you to think on your feet and produce persuasive arguments. It's true that every Tom dick and harry in India that can get a law firm or scc to sponsor is organising a moot these days to show that they exist as a law school - these competitions have extremely poorly drafted problems usually by an author who has probably never explored a good research topic or written a law review article in his life and are judged based on dog shit standards by lawyers who havent fully read through a book that goes beyond 200 pages. This should not take away from the true value of the academic endeavour that is associated with a good moot (this is assuming you can work enough to be on a team that does one of these good moots - that atleast try to make the moot a good research exercise for the participants).

Beyond a point, law firm work or litigation for that matter IS about juggling different deliverables and prioritising, your participation in a good mood along with good academic credentials only SHOWS how much you can take on and still do well and shows how much overall value you bring to the table and I think such a candidate is far more valuable at a firm and a team than mere rank 1 or winner at a moot with nothing else to show. No recruiter would ever place their bets on someone who crashed an entire semester to do one moot. It just shows a terrible inability to balance or work hard.