Fully agree, although no idea where you got the previous internships point from. I did not mention previous internships at all. I would prefer to have an intern who excelled in corporate law than a batch topper who excelled in subjects that are seemingly random. Skills can be taught, interest cannot. I want to know if the intern will find the work boring or not, and hence require a demonstrated interest in what they are applying for. Statistically, interest also would mean sincerity, although it does not mean that other person will not be sincere.

That's not how internships are confirmed, experience in practice areas only matters in laterals, previous internships literally are of no value to the HR or the partner.

What matters is your college and batch rank, period. Be from a top college in the 20s or from a GLC in top 3, and you're in. Nobody has time to check for one month "internships" at other firms where the only work done is basic research and shit. Moots and other stuff, nobody absolutely gives a freaking damn, just be good in academics. Experience works when you start working as an associate, where your academics start mattering lesser and lesser, when your PQE takes over.

A good CV is a CV that fits the bill of what the firm requires at that point of time. Nobody gets rejected because they have 1 moot instead of 2. They get rejected because they have a CV that either looks like you have no idea what you want to do or have applied to a Cap Marks position while your entire CV screams IPR.