A fundamental rift has opened up at L&L Partners over how its long-held promoter equity should be opened up and distributed to other partners in the firm.
The corporate partnership firm, formerly known as Luthra & Luthra, currently has the two co-founding partners hold 100% of the equity: managing partner Rajiv Luthra is understood to hold 66.6%, while senior partner Mohit Saraf owns 33.4%.
Rajiv Luthra has pitched for both Saraf and himself to dilute only 20% of each of their equity on a pro rata basis, freeing only 20% for other future equity partners, we understand from multiple sources in the firm.
By contrast, we understand from several partners that Saraf has been in favour of diluting both their holdings to the point where between 30% to 40% of equity, or more, is available for others (with Luthra giving up the lion’s share of this). Such dilution would not be on a pro rata basis of his and Rajiv Luthra’s equity holdings, which had been fixed more than 20 years ago.
We understand that Saraf’s rationale for diluting more, according to the statements he has made internally, is that he believes a more significant chunk of free equity is required to make such an equity partnership attractive and workable to existing partners and laterals.
Rajiv Luthra’s argument, by contrast, has been that any change should happen only gradually, without releasing a lot of equity at once. He has, however, made some concessions over the course of the discussions.
Another issue of debate is that Rajiv Luthra’s retirement age is currently fixed in the partnership deed at 80 years, and in addition, even after his retirement or the event of his death, his entire equity stake in the firm would go to his family.
Correction 18:09: We had initially misreported that the retirement age under the deed was 85 years, when it is in fact 80 years. The error is regretted. Saraf’s retirement age is fixed at 75 years under the deed.
We understand that discussions had begun again some time late last year, and have been gaining importance within the partnership since then, with several proposals and counter-proposals having been made and floated around.
By contrast, according to a number of L&L partners, we understand that Saraf is in favour of getting this process done more quickly, in part perhaps also prompted by his disagreement over the semi-separate L&L litigation partnership having deferred fee-earner salaries.
Update 18:04: Rajiv Luthra has issued the following statement and we have made two corrections pursuant to the statement, as applicable and indicated:
The details you are inadvertently been carrying are so totally incorrect that it’s difficult to term them mere inaccuracies. It’s a blatant attempt to portray the exact opposite of what was envisaged & how we were to arrive at the new L&L structure for the future.
While these matters of equity have been discussed in detail in multiple partner meetings, it will be incorrect on my part to divulge more details without violating confidentiality that governs these discussions.
Because sometimes,more than 30 colleagues have been privy to these meetings it’s not for me to have to convey both the details & the spirit in which these exercises were undertaken.
The inexactitude of even subordinate details like age of retirement, co-founder, etc. are so obvious that they do not even merit my refuting them.
However in the spirit of discretion and in the way we’ve done things at the firm, I’m merely going to state for the record that these are total falsehoods masquerading as a portrayal of insider moves.
Many in the wider senior (non-equity) corporate partnership, are believed to be in favour of getting equity; over and above that, many would also like a significant democratic say in how the firm is run and managed.
At present, the camps appear to be at an impasse, according to several sources, and ‘words’ are understood to have been exchanged.
For junior L&L partners, much of the discussions would at present be academic, and while many would like the idea of equity and a firm without a glass ceiling, some might also be sympathetic to Rajiv Luthra’s approach of not making any drastic changes, particularly at such challenging economic times with a looming Covid-19 depression.
We have reached out to Rajiv Luthra and Saraf for comment and will update this story if we hear from them or come by any other information.
20 year old deed
We understand that at the crux of the dispute lies the partnership deed entered into between Saraf and Rajiv Luthra when Luthra & Luthra Law Offices in 1999, as it had been called when Saraf had joined as Luthra’s partner and the proprietorship became a partnership. It was back then a much smaller operation. Luthra had started the firm around 1990.
Correction 18:06: We had initially stated that both Saraf and Luthra were co-founders of the firm, but we understand that the firm had been founded in 1990 by Luthra and Saraf only became an equity partner in 1999 when it became a partnership.
The firm, which rebranded to L&L Partners in 2018 in a bid to move away from the promoter-driven brand and to reflect that it now had more than 300 fee-earners and many partners.
The deed, however, has remained in place.
The never-ending equity story
Opening up the firm’s equity has been on the agenda - but perennially shelved - for many years at L&L.
In one of our first major law firm scoops, in 2009, the management had vowed it would be moving to an equity lockstep model, modelled on foreign law firms’.
Rajiv Luthra had told us in June 2009: “I had founded the firm and over the years I kept releasing equity. But then we thought it would be more efficient to bring in a new system.
“We’ve taken a firm view on it - the firm is nice and mature and needs to go to the next level.”
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
They want RKL to stay & bring business
They want MS to stay & bring business
WHILE maximising what they get when the golden doors open
Their (let's call it) "enthusiasm" is making them eye RKL's bigger pie instead of pro-rata dilution by RKL & MS
While anyone can see it makes sense for gradual pro rata dilution
They've swayed MS & made him feel like a 'victim'
Despite his fortunes sky-rocketing tied to Mr Big Man
Mark my words:
Those making these opportunistic 'moves' will quickly shut the door for future generations
All this has become public only now, but has been brewing for a LONG TIME
Everyone thinks twice before applying to L&L
So many talented lawyers have left, or career trajectories irreparably 'made' to fail because of politics
It's been clear for a while - this ship is sinking in slow-motion
Those making these 'insider moves'... Here's a question
If you're so valuable & deserve equity
Why didn't you gather self-respect & LEAVE anytime in the past decade?
Fittingly, instead of opening the Golden Doors, they're getting a proverbial .... shower or a .... finger instead
A good lawyer, also having studied in Chaudhary Charan Singh (CCS) University, informs me of the judgment in Bharwada Bhogini Hirjibhai vs. State of Gujrat AIR 1983 SC 753, whereby the apex court holds that over much importance cannot be attached to minor discrepancies, which do not go to the root of the matter. The fact that the carrot of dilution of equity has been dangled by Mr. Luthra for over a decade has neither being disputed nor as a matter of fact can be. A firm which claims to work on structuring deals for clients, but is unable to engineer its own structure for over a decade, will have to do some soul searching and it seems these details and discussions cannot be suppressed any further.
The state of affairs in the CSS partnership is rather sad and the ex judge-lawyer leaving recently shows that the new breed will not accept the mai-baap culture any further. I recall Mr. Luthra speaking of his having brought in a new culture in L&L when he started it, as earlier there was an expectation that the junior lawyers would also touch the feet of the boss when he paid them the salary. Now the demand of those emancipated individuals seeking a seat at the table as equals must seem a betrayal to him. The fake news spin comes from the shock of those days of groveling coming to an end. The mere thought of equity in a professionally run law firm going to descendants must be abhorred. Kangana Ranaut where are you? Kian don't you smell NEPOTISM?
That entire team was in a different league, and just not in-sync with the drag which L&L Litigation has become.
And that's the reason almost everyone who mattered in the team, including the ex-judge lawyer himself, has moved on.
On a separate note, L&L owners (who refer to themselves as sovereign of L&L) do not have the heart to share equity. Big man is only capable of throwing good parties but when it comes to ownership, he will not give up control ever as he
believes it is his firm and he wants to leave it to his family. As far as MS is concerned, his intent is exactly the opposite. As MS is getting older, he is also becoming bigger and his aspirations are also becoming bigger and therefore he is not happy being Big man's right hand anymore. In all fairness, he has been running the firm for last 7-8 years and big man is only available to be consulted on major matters. Therefore, from MS s perspective, it is time that this firm be run completely in a manner MS envisions. For that to happen, he needs to ensure that big man is not in unilateral control. Hence MS would prefer dilution in a manner that big man alone does not have veto power and I assume MS is hoping that the new generation of partners will support him in his decisions, if he fights to get equity for them. Typical movie plot.
Thus RKL should dilute greater stake?
Sounds disingenuous
C'mon, MS. Pro rata dilution seems fair
But please, by all means - carry on serenading.
And while you point out about Delhi Gymkhana, let me confess I belong to an environment not as rarefied as yours and so have no idea what happens beyond the walls of such a club and didn’t wish to google it to educate me about it. Also, in your appraisal it would be pointed out that Papua New Guinea and NZ may not have whiskeys of repute to make the Big Man boast.
Finally, if you are within the firm you are aware of what Big Man does while in Citi and while elsewhere. [...] To also be claiming that he generates work from the numerous conflict checks he sends is such travesty [...]
Oh BTW Gold Club butter chicken is good.
Judgment puri padhni chahiye - not just the portion that's suitable.
If you're opposing a big company in a matter, you don't need to be a PART of that Company in order to represent your Client. You can get the correct facts through - research! The fact that you don't know what happens 'beyond the walls' of clubs goes to show - again - how unreliable your comment is. Also, its very easy to badmouth "any lawyer" under security of anonymity - talk about giving a bad name to the profession.
Client developments often happen over a drink, dinner, etc. It's nothing unique to L&L. How does it matter if its at a Club or a Hotel on Lodhi Road?
Hope you got the bigger picture - and yes: DGC Chicken sandwiches ftw!
Why don’t you ask him about his contribution to development of relations with a leading foreign commercial bank with operations in India? Or ask him why India’s leading construction company doesn’t fancy working with us and he hasn’t been able to turn that around. Or about his regular ME visits but from which not 1USD of work has come. Even in cap markets where boards get involved and so a number of what he shows off as his bum chums are around, he cannot push things most time and this even when the market leading CM team was there a year back. The new one gives him ample excuse since it is still finding their feet.
While there was a time and place when clients from overseas would get charmed by the Great Indian Rope Trick (aka maybe the chicken s/w at DGC), that’s not the case anymore. Today people first want to check credentials and ability and he comes across as an extremely shallow person with no ability except to talk about his greatness and that insurance deal which he brokered 10 years back or the car company whose taxes he used to do and whose chairman sent him a car when he visited London or the Water works for the Bollywood actor. The Rope Trick and personal glory could work as an icing but is not the main dessert and so I again reiterate his contribution is depleted or even negative. That one coffee deal or defence JV deal or banking company’s corruption review in 10 years counts for nothing. He sits on board of a major media company and we get nothing from them (his excuse he is an independent director) or their much larger affiliate. If he wishes to control the firm then he should be delivering the mega bucks through mega deals and not sermonize about culture, values and integrity as a means to deviate from the topic at hand. Irony is that other than him no one else in the Corporate side has even remotely come close to being even [...]
Theoretically, if Mohit makes 22cr then Rajiv makes 44 cr. Question is whether this amount is justified or this amount which Rajiv/ Mohit make is because of their exploitation of junior partners. That is the reason why corporate partners are saying that Rajiv and Mohit’s interest needs to be at 51 per cent ownership and the new partners should be at 49 per cent ownership....this implies that 50% of 66 cr is available for the new partners’ kitty and 16 cr each to Rajiv and Mohit. In this fight Mohit will make less money and he will have to share his power with new equity member. Yes, corporate Partners will make more money but this pop and mom place will be transformed into an institution. There will be accountability of senior mgt; democratic decision making process be introduced and where junior partners can call the Firm’s as there .
On the other hand, Rajiv is fighting that his time and expense cannot be audited by junior partners , he does not get diluted to 25.5 % although his efforts don’t justify even 10 % ownership, he can keep extracting money from the Firm till he retires at 80, and he and his family can get 8 cr annually after the age of 80, his family can inherit his ownership after completing law from Meerut university; he has power to act only in his interest by asking performing partners to leave the Firm if they question him, he has the ability to change the destiny of the Firm by using his veto rights.
In litigation practice Rajiv’s interest was 33% and Bobby’s interest was 18% in 2014. Bobby resigned in 2014 and his only condition was that he wanted his interest to be increased from 18% to 28% based on his efforts and Rajiv’s interest should be reduced from 33% to 23 % based on Rajiv’s efforts. Basis the seniors partners’ effort, Rajiv was forced to bring down his interest in the litigation practice to 23% and Bobby’s interest is now at 28%. Same thing the corporate partners’ are asking that Rajiv and Mohit’s interest be at 25.5 % each and 49 % be a available for distribution. Rajiv has refused to even meet equity dilution committee members in last the 6 months so that he can maintain status quo.
So let’s not make it into a R v. M fight. Even assuming both are as disinterested (which last 12 months have shown is not the case and MS is more jeen than ever), the issue is where is equity and ownership for performers or should we as a firm keep losing people because of such shortsightedness.
In my view, the Big Man is [...] insecure, and tries to clip the wings of star partners like (Shishir, Madhurima, Aparna) when he seems them as a threat. It’s no secret that these chaps were pulled up for meeting clients (big or small) without the Big Man being present. He doesn’t even know the L of law. He is more of a businessman than a lawyer - “who knows how to get things done”. It’s because of this reason private equity clients will never consider Luthra as their first choice - these smart people don’t want to bend the rules and are able to see through the BS.
Hope the cigar helps in understanding what's said here.
If you think that RKL will allow for any meaningful dilution and that too with him requiring to dilute more, then you are beyond naive.
10 years delay is the only thing that people must remember.
This is all talk to get people to calm down as tempers are a little hot in some teams ...
Neither of them will take any real steps - smarter lawyers have figured this and moved out than wait for next 10 years.
Business World inaugural awards splashed all over has SHARDUL Shroff as head of the jury. The awardees include daughter dearest and son in law.
Why won’t Rajiv Luthra want to leave everything to his daughters. # Shroff inspired # nepotism # will Kian be Arnab # Is Mohit going to be Kangana
This is a joke! Really it’s time to call these legal awards out.
Can you point out even one out of those 8 lawyers that doesn’t deserve to be on that list? They’re all young stars in their own practice areas.....
Numerous independent intl magazines have recognised their talent
And please don’t forget that there were numerous other top class, honest, leading lawyers in the jury whose integrity is beyond question.....
Facts, not baseless insinuation.
Tenets of natural justice since the young stars at Sam lack basic fundamentals:-
1. No man shall be judge in his own cause. Howdy Baby Shroff and son in law.
2. Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. Howdy chair of the jury awarding and rewarding his family.
Book of proverbs from the time of Jacob - He who digs his brothers grave will falls into it himself. CSS sends his regards. The tide is turning.
The thing is, even those who apply to these awards know for the most part that such Under-40 type awards mostly bring a badge you could put in the signature section of your e-mail, and nothing more. But you have to start somewhere right? [To get to IFLR, I mean].
The target are also potential clients, and not peers. We all know our peers would more often than not be aware of who is worth what.
Kian make a list please of all the paid awards. From the legal era ones (they ask for 75 k) to BW who ask for 25k.
Now you can debate on whether that is : (1) a reflection on the (lack of) quality of good enough under 40 lawyers at Luthra; or (2) a reflection of Rajiv Luthra's ethics that he didn't nominate too many from Luthta even though he was on jury; or (3) the other lawyers nominated by Luthra were not deemed to be good enough by other jury members; or (4) Luthra/ relevant partners didn't want to pay much for the rankings; or (5) whether the Luthra management believes in not promoting its partners for such awards, as they might believe they can't let these partners become too big.
I know enough partners at Luthra who are not 40 yet, so it can't be the case that they don't have enough under-40 partners. I'm really surprised that a particular corporate partner on the [...] floor did not make it to this list.
Why point fingers at Bollywood when it seems that nepotism is rampant in the legal fraternity as well.
Based on this experience if your firm's partner is not on the judging panel don't take part.
Under 40, over 20, just started, about to finish...... whatnot.
Typical of Mohit and Rajiv to play these games while others get nothing. As equity partners with such huge earning they ought to have stepped up a long ago, instead of just having a dispute between themselves while others are made to work like log bearers. This culture permeates through the organization. There are some so called 'senior corporate partners' who are a dread to work with. How Rajiv and Mohit treat the Firm, they treat their teams, with unprofessional behaviour, yelling matches, zero accountability or responsibility and mistreatment being meted toward every member in their team. The way office boys and guards are treated publicly by these so called high and mighty begs disbelief in their education and value system. Everyone knows this and at least amongst us associates this is a widely known and discussed.
As an alumni, I only hope that the Rajiv, Mohit and their respective coterie of champions, recognise the hubris of arrogance they are sitting on. Equity is only one thing that is wrong with the Firm. Wake up and smell the liquor on the 9th Floor. Not just me, most of my batchmates have already left, or are about to leave, because of this toxic culture that is permeated by a few.
RKL says 20% of their respective equity which would mean 20% of 66.6 and 20% of 33.3. Means 20% overall. Mohit is saying 40% overall.
As to what is wrong with the firm, yes equity is one. But is root cause as there is no accountability of the leadership today. With meaningful equity we hope that would happen as also would democratic spirit as alluded to in the article. Challenge is RKL believes he doesn’t need to explain himself to anybody while he can judge everyone. Such inferiority complex. He knows his conduct is abhorrent and with new equity, he could be held to account and so on one or the other reason, he wishes to exit his commitments and obligations.
Mohit has been willing to consider equity but previously has had a challenge with amount. Better part of last decade the firm was in the doldrums and so a significant dilution would have meant people realising the mess the firm was in but a nominal dilution would have enabled him to give nominal sums from his / RKL’s pocket masquerading as equity payout. So he pitched for nominal but even then RKL filibustered with need to build a collegiate atmosphere and growing the pie etc etc etc. Today firm has turned a corner and so Mohit knows nominal would not be good and wishes for greater release on basis of value contribution but hits the Great Wall of RKL whose argument remains the same - collegiate atmosphere, family feelings etc. The guy is not even ingenious enough to come with new arguments.
Neither a Mug
Lets invent a Drug
Which will kill the Bug
And no one is a Thug.
Dont behave like you are blind
The Earth is Round
Touching the ground
I am Bangalore bound
Lawyers who have interacted with you know, what a strong work ethic who have. If L&L has reached this height it is only because of the sheer sheer hard work done by MS. You work day and night for the betterment of the firm and you strive to make L&L the best firm.
Litigation (which at Luthra includes competition, tax, trade, IPR) is significantly (about 20% ) lower from what I've heard.
So they need to give a little extra green to lure people in...
In fact they give ppos a third year end itself because after that people tend to ignore them
The details you are inadvertently been carrying are so totally incorrect that it’s difficult to term them mere inaccuracies. It’s a blatant attempt to portray the exact opposite of what was envisaged & how we were to arrive at the new L&L structure for the future.
WHICH DETAILS ARE INCORRECT. THAT YOU DON’T WISH TO RETAIN RIGHT FOR YOUR KIDS AND NEPHEW TO JUMP IN AND GRAB EQUITY AT ANYTIME IN TOTAL DISREGARD FOR PRINCIPLES OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARTNERSHIP. OR THAT YOU DONT WISH TO RECEIVE A PENSION (IF 10 CRORES ANNUALLY CAN BE CALLED THAT). OR THAT WORDS HAVE NOT BEEN EXCHANGED WITH YOU CALLING NAMES TO PEOPLE WHO QUESTIONED YOU. OR THAT YOU HAVE NOT MOVED YOUR POSITION MULTIPLE TIMES.
While these matters of equity have been discussed in detail in multiple partner meetings, it will be incorrect on my part to divulge more details without violating confidentiality that governs these discussions.
HO HO HO. NOTHING HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. ALL WE HAVE HEARD IS YOUR [...] RANTS. YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SHARE ANYTHING EVEN IF YOU WANTED [...]. YOUR RUNNING AWAY FROM MEETINGS AND HIDING IN YOUR ROOM. SHAME.
Because sometimes,more than 30 colleagues have been privy to these meetings it’s not for me to have to convey both the details & the spirit in which these exercises were undertaken.
THERE WERE TWO SPIRITS. ONE OF PARTNERS WILLING TO DISCUSS AND ONE OF YOURS WISHING TO RANT. AND CALLING HARDWORKING LAWYERS AS MONSTERS. AND TODAY CALLING THEM COLLEAGUES. HOW MANY FACES DO YOU HAVE.
The inexactitude of even subordinate details like age of retirement, co-founder, etc. are so obvious that they do not even merit my refuting them.
DONT HIDE BEHIND MINOR INACCURACIES
However in the spirit of discretion and in the way we’ve done things at the firm, I’m merely going to state for the record that these are total falsehoods masquerading as a portrayal of insider moves.
YOU ARE AWARE THIS IS THE BROAD TRUTH. YOU DONT WISH TO DILUTE. FIRST YOU GAVE INEFFICIENCT PROPOSALS AND WHEN IT APPEARED THAT ONE COULD ACTUALLY BE ACCEPTED YOU WALKED AWAY AND MADE A PROPOSAL YOU KNEW WOULD NEVER WORK WHICH IS OF PROPORTIONAL DILUTION OF A RIDICULOUSLY LOW EQUITY.
No salary appraisals
No bonus
They look great together
Priyanka Chopra & Nick Jonas
Shame on ALL of you!
Pollyanna - an eternally cheerfully optimistic person who believes in the goodness of the world
Luthraite - an eternally hopeful person who believes in the benevolence and goodness of his leadership
RKL (synonym) - [...]
Now that a lot of talent has left and ability to attract fresh talent is depleted and consequently nature of work is of lower end qua peers in other firms, the firm and its current bunch of counsels is suddenly awake to mortality. However there again, one person along with some 4-5 fanboys / fangirls is an outlier and lives in the past. THIS FIRM IS OVER. Some who have market creds, should dust off their CVs.
@Kian, you seem to have a copy of the partnership deed. You must clarify as this is creating confusion on a large scale. Your article articulates position by RKL, which seems to be a blatant mis-attempt at obfuscating the truth.
Btw, there was another Firm in 1995, which was the previous avatar- which had 3 partners- two of whom were RKL and Mohit Saraf. Even by that logic, Mohit would be a co-founder. So basically in RKL's statement the so called 'lies' that he calls out were on retirement age (which as we now understand was misreported as 85 as opposed to 80! Big Difference!!!!!!!), and co-founder- which is just not true. [...]
RKL used to tom-tom about how L&L is not a family law firm unlike the Shroffs. Clearly this was only because his heirs were so young that they cannot be lawyers yet unlike the Shroffs. The intention was always to bequeath the firm to them. In essence the Luthra folks are working for the enrichment of the Luthra family! What logic much wow. God forbid if something were to happen to RKL, the Firm will have to pay through their nose (a little birdie tells me its 100 of crores) to buy off equity from his heirs! RIDICULOUS. How can this be agreed!
Obviously both have been fooling people on the premise of doling out equity but, clearly, both knew all along that this will be anything but simple...
So I think both are equally at fault here...one for consistently lying, the other for simply fooling people on false pretexts when the writing on the wall was always clear!
Bhaago yahaan se...
MS is hard working, really works round the clock. He is a serious person, very difficult to do any BS with him. He is Brutally frank, and you will get things as they are, on your face. Which is a big relief, Atleast you know where you stand on an issue / idea. He also has high EQ and has spent considerable time mentoring younger lawyers and guiding them in tough time. You may agree with him or disagree with him - but you have a clear picture and no subterfuge.
There is a very real and human side to MS which is not publicly advertised and hence less known. I remember a young associate had lost his father, And MS was at the crematorium at 7.30am on a chilly winter morn just to help that chap out and helped him go through the last rites. And hardly 3-4 other people from Office had come. Or how he was gently helping and explaining things to SV’s little daughter (not even 10 years old may be) when she was Lighting SV’s pyre. [...]
RKL on the other hand, always was the “fun” guy. He painted an aspirational picture with the lavish lifestyle, good food, luxuries, first class international travel, Cool gadgets, no serious work, and A lot of alcohol (almost daily in office till 2-3 am when many bottles would be drunk in one sitting and many youngsters asked to join) [...]. He avoided the tough issues, [...] (and practically left MS to carry the burden And load). When Madhu had quit and the All partner Meeting called to disc the issue - RKL dialled in for ten mins and then silently dropped off the call. While Mohit was handling the questions, tough decisions, team morale, client issues everything. Many many such examples.
RKL’s misogynistic comments and loose talk have caused a lot of damage and pissed off clients, potential clients, foreign law firm partners, and lawyers working at Luthra too. It’s very convenient for RKL to suddenly pretend to be the whole and sole creator and karta dharta of the firm. His has been more of a “management in absentia” act.
Did he not get paid lavishly for it?
If MS is unhappy at L&L
he should do what the rest of the world did (or is about to), ie leave
MS (and his boys) should start a new firm & see if they pull in comparable $$
Demanding fairness should not result in Mohit having to start afresh. The firm belong as much to him as to that other man. And to Mohit’s credit he has shouldered responsibility of the firm while the other one only throws his Historical contract in others faces. [...]
“Demanding fairness should not result in Mohit having to start afresh. The firm belong as much to him as to that other man.”
33% belonged to him not “as much to him”
This is why deeds are in writing
Because one works hard doesn’t magically write them into greater equity
Call this BS what it is
Minority partner & noisy associates bullying majority partner to handover his share
Shameful
For the person on the comments thread who says “we have no option but to laugh” at his poor jokes, I am sorry you have no spine and no self respect. That’s the reason RKLs favorite word is “naukar” and he unabashedly refers to everyone at the firm as naukar, bhuke nange, kaddu, etc etc
Clearly he had not encountered The Big Man. He alone started, managed, grew and sustained the Firm. Leonard was a loser.
Any insider news?
Tell tale signs
1. The name change was a part of a larger plan. Associates were explained the rationale for the name change after the name was changed. However, there was no coherent reason for the change. RKL and MS seemed to have their own version of what the reason was. The associates left with zero clarity about WTH had just happened.
2. The evaluation at the firm is very ad hoc, one person had all the say, all decisions were made by him. He would neither listen to the partner who worked closely with his team, nor read the evaluation forms in any detail. A person close to him would carry tales to him about other partners and their teams, and that would be the basis of the decision making. In fact, these comments here have mentioned Meerut University and CCS University, the fact is that this one person who is not even a lawyer registered with the bar council would take positions on law and treat some of the finest analytical minds with absolute disdain - not because they were wrong, but because the propositions they mentioned were completely unheard by him. It was not his fault, he was being asked evaluate people who were better trained in the law and its nuances.
3. The story of sexism in the firm is another level. At BD meetings, sexist jokes were par for course. Here no one is any better than the other. In fact the newer younger members of the EC are no less. With newer additions one thought, things would change - it didn't. All that they were interested in is ensuring they get entrenched and get better rights than any other- after all they would now be sitting at the podium during partners meetings!
4. In a recent sting of comments here a partner was called out for high levels of attrition, no one seems to focus on the high levels of attrition in certain other teams. Teams which have a horrible work culture. No meaningful work starts before 2 pm in the pre lockdown days. This team was more insterested in sitting late, participating in the booze filled parties at the cafeteria, or the BD meetings in the senior partners homes etc. The associates were made to sit late, called in on weekends, while the partner would again come late in the evening while on the way to their many "social commitments". Yet, the team was rewarded - why because there is no meritocracy in this firm. It's is Club, which thrives on bad mouthing anyone who is not or doesn't become like them.
5. I think it's high time, this kind of behaviour in law firms - nepotism, cliques, sexism and absence of meritocracy is brought out in the open, and no one person or partner is sacrificed because they made genuine mistakes. This is nothing but a scheme to shy away from key issues. In fact this is not just a LL issue, this affects a lot of firms. The issue nepotism and conflict of interest highlighted in these comments is another level. Daddy sits and rewards his Family, ...how can an educated and aware profession like lawyers take this nonsense any longer??? In fact, not standing up now would prove it true - the litigators don't consider corporate lawyers as lawyers because we are all so lacking in any courage.
And Big Man has apparently since last couple of days been running an agenda along with fossils within against various people who dared to rise against him. Words like Monsters, killers, integrity-less etc has been used by him and his against some of the best lawyers in India and definitely in the firm with threats around a purge politely put as reorganization. As I heard, shiver went through my spine. Apparently the Night of Long Knives is coming. I feel safe and my partner feels safe but thinks the dissenters are relying too much on Big Man’s good faith and within next 2 weeks would be out of a job.
Harappa moves
Equity is promised by Dec 15
Big man seeks to dissolve the firm in Dec instead of giving equity
EC begs Big Man to reconsider since 300 families are at stake
Big Man agrees with 5% topline and 10% incentive for work generated by him
Big Man withdraws agreement
Big Man offers 16% equity 12.5 his and 3.5 from the other
When asked to reconsider Big Man offers a complete new proposal. He would have 10% topline, 10% incentive and 20% non-diluting equity. All this without giving any knowledge of numbers but back of envelope would work out to him retaining 55% equity and only 20% in loss. Remember Big Man is fair.
Without further discussions, seems Big Man withdraws this proposal and comes up with 10% topline, 10% incentive and 1% equity. Or alternately his reduction to 40, Mohit’s to 27 and rest for others. To be noted all proposals have him diluting disproportionately.
Without any substantial discussions, Big Man withdraws this proposal also and suddenly says 20% equity with both him and Mohit proportionately giving up.
In all of these he retains retirement at 75, vetoes on material actions including public communication! And pension which varies from 6 to 10 crore or 5% topline etc. and inheritability by people.
Now please judge where is anyone else wrong in trying to address their concerns to him. But his response is to say people have acted in bad faith and as BeeBuzz mentioned, he is seeking to create grounds to fire people on basis of “not in interest of the firm”. And “Sourav” and “Daanveer” and his estranged archer brother are supporting him.
Fascism is this and there is no remedy in writ also.
BeeHive - you would survive and flourish elsewhere. Don’t worry. We have discussed this before, you should have left much earlier.
Oh as a footnote, he keeps on pronouncing that he will leave and partners should pay him his monies as per the deed. So new partners to have a future first have to bankroll him and potentially stare at a bankruptcy. The monies we are talking about are in range of 100 crores as they arise on the strength of the firm’s best years in a decade and have to be paid in the worst year of the firm in multiple decades. Even if people are willing to pay, he moves the goal post and doesn’t discuss payment plans.
Also as a footnote, dissolution continues to hang on people's head.
Estranged brother - got it.
Sourav? further hint please.
Danveer is [...]
Estranged brother is [...]
Full soap opera..
tired of these guys.
I’m going in-house and never giving these bunch of lawyers any piece of my work, no matter where they end up.. what a bunch of jokers..
@Kasparov63
When one group fights for power at all costs vs a group fighting for the rule of law, the second group had damned well better mobilize while it still can, because it only gets harder. Trust me on this one.
MS - you are the second group. Trust Garry.
Shroffs bring their entire time and family into their firms. The firm is them and they are the firm. With Rajiv the firm is just one of his money making ventures. Remember he does not involve himself with the firm affairs except to come and say sweet nonsense. In SAMs case the father, daughter, wife and son in law are all stars in their own right. In CAM, father brings tremendous value and while wife, son and daughter may not be same levels as their Delhi counterparts, they still live and die the firm.
The size of the firms is different. The others have made their firms into large powerhouses while L&L due to Rajiv’s and Mohit’s and the 3 litigation guys’ lack of vision has remained small. A 20% of 150 crore profit versus a 20% of 65 crore collective profit across the two firms is quite a different ball game.
This difference and what others bring and have brought to the table vis-à-vis L&L’s similarly placed counterparts is what the 5 Wise Men need to understand when comparing. Seems Mohit has while the others are arguing.
Do not feel sorry
Why so many chores
If MS made 22 crores
The issues raised by the retainers at Luthra are quite interesting and far reaching if they succeed. It opens a complete new paradigm for all other firms. Sovereignty of family as owners may need to dilute to more democratic principles. No more penalisation of counsels in bad times while you roll away in green in the good.
Give meaningful and co-equal decision making powers; even if economic claim is high as you have contributed historically and “would” dilute over time, cap your voting rights. Banks are required to do so and as the biggest advisor to banks you could learn from them. Not that historical contribution should matter.
If value linked sharing of profits is brought in, next generation in my firm may be very worried. Uncle’s firm, not as much but they should also.
Godspeed Luthra “junior” partners - may you succeed and may we all gain from that success. Go for democracy and value. Go for broke.
100 crores in 2020 or to pay him 10 crores after 10 years for 10 years while he enjoys fruits of being equity for another 10 years is both unreasonable. And carry the risk that [...], we may be at a risk of 135 crores based on current numbers doing the round. Please please help us.
And in any case solve this mess. A few peaceful months is all we want.
1. Pay on time;
2. Dont cut our fees as our kids are demanding too apart from merc, beemers and volvo;
3. Please take back the people who had left in anguish;
4. Please allocate work amongst the teams properly;
5. Lastly, please change the so called [...]
Rajiv batted first and made a mess of his opportunity when he kept getting beaten by half trackers and gentle looseners. But he responded well mid-match by throwing some harsh body line which given match was in his home grounds no one noticed. JPs now have Mohit still on the crease but their other star batsmen seem to have been disoriented and badly beaten and appear shaken by Rajiv and his team who have indulged in some serious sledging, abuse and unsportsmanlike behavior. Quite shameful but well it’s Crockett even though their behavior is not cricket. Mohit has managed to paste deliveries out of the park. And appears to be in good form. Rajiv has been unable to find any significant counters except some more sledge but Mohit has given it back as well as it has come. Taken quick singles also on his way to a remarkably strong position.
Match however is poised on a knife’s edge. Support of fans seems to be with Mohit and JPs to pull through and win the match and the series but definitely the series.
There has been request that a time out be taken but the teams have rejected it. Crowd within the stadium is silent but beyond the stadium there is steady swell of support for the JPs.
Maybe just maybe Mohit is the Sachin of the 1998 Coca Cola Cup. What memories. What a finish. What a player. But of course this could also be the the Sydney 2008 match with team Rajiv clearly representing the victors with their rabid, boorish, unsportsmanlike, crybaby attitude against the more talented and more deserving opponents and when all else appears to be failing ironically throwing respect, integrity, honesty at the other. Well such is life. But then life is Sach. Go man go.
This dispute regarding equity dilution is being made out to be a dispute between the Rajiv and the rest of the partnership and that is an incorrect categorization. However, if you want to represent it to be so, then fairness demands you also carry the alternate categorization- this is about a power grab - in which Mohit and an unelected EC pretends to represent the wider partnership. They do not, they only represent themselves. If they did, they would consult with the wider partnership, the record will demonstrate that they have not done the same, instead they have made self-serving suggestions.
1. At present there is an offer of proportionate dilution on the table, why wouldn't Mohit accept it and start the process?
2. Why can't the partnership operate more democratically, with NO VETO for either Rajiv or Mohit ?
3. In due course, as the partnership matures and votes for dilution from the largest equity holders - which despite dilution will be Mohit and Rajiv - they should be required to dilute- and NOT BE ABLE TO VETO IT - why is such an arrangement not acceptable Rajiv or Mohit?
4. There has to be accountability - but that has to apply to ALL partners - Rajiv and Mohit included. Operational power has been concentrated in Mohit and his close people for far too long. Policies are framed, only to be altered at the time of implementation because proper implementation would affect certain partners and their selfish interests. This can happen only because the present feudal and undemocratic system is being implemented and operationalized by Mohit. If he is such a champion of democracy and non-feudal behavior, he needs to agree to dilute along with Rajiv, get rid of the unbalanced and unchecked power that he has in the present system. Will he agree? Will they agree? Let's wait and watch the match, as an earlier circket speak commetator had commented.
Will the seniors here please advise what we can do or should do? We have no one to help or guide us.
So find your smoking gun elsewhere. You can call L&L HR and get correct information.
The Partner at Bangalore quit in March and not right now. There were compatibility issues between his understanding of [...] versus the Firm's understanding of the same.
This was and still is a real godsend opportunity for RKL, holding the lion's share of the equity, who of course over the last 10 years had handed over the reign of day to day control to MS, to dilute disproportionally in favour of committed and motivated bunch of determined younger lawyers, created an institution and left behind a legacy for all times to remember whenever he packs his boots.
Ironically, this restructuring would have created enough checks and balances, to check any capricious and arbitrary exercise of power by MS and hedged RKL's risks, as these individuals, and their leadership would have matured over the years. Although, it would be fair statement to make that nothing is dearer to MS than the Firm almost at the cost of personal relationships and most decisions (if not all) of MS have been guided by that. Reality is that those who RKL jumped to call out as MS's camp also are equally fond of RKL, but it is the principle of point where they have taken a position that is polarizing RKL's point of view. There was absolutely no need for RKL to get aggressive with them.
Truly hope that good sense prevails, one long heated discussion in a closed environment for 2 days with social distancing of course, is all that is required to avoid what we always regarded as the unthinkable. I implore to the decision makers. As they say, it is much easier to break things thank keep them intact.
Has anybody been asking these questions? Or is it the usual attitude of associates not really mattering in the larger scheme.
Really bothered about people my age out there in L&L.
Would also be nice if we associates got some sort of official briefing, but transparency isn't the name of the game here at L&L. Not with bonus, increment, promotions, nothing. There wasn't even a briefing when an entire practice area left the firm just over a year back.
@Kian - I'm surprised you've not done an update on this already!
Today was, at best, RKL's attempt to remind everyone, and not just MS, what the Ls stand for.
Major shouting match between Mohit Saraf and Luthra.
Allegations included that Rajeev Luthra took [...] and also [...]
In the red corner, RKL. MS in the blue.
Punches were thrown, mostly below the belt.
Referee Bobby who seemed biased was personally invested in the matter.
Some threats, idle, some serious. Rich history between the heavy weights on full display - including Mukesh Ambani, Citibank and Manan Lahoty. Will leave it for everyone to judge who suffers from impostor syndrome and who from a grandiose image of self.
Miss Secretary intervening to make the big boys apologise for swearing on their daughters rang the final bell finishing the match.
What remains to be seen is whether the death knell for L&L has also been rung alongwith it!
There was no reason to have the Town Hall till he had a clear direction and strategy for people to accept or understand. He has been saying a month, yesterday it went to 2 months, in the Partners Group. He should have brought all his grievances with [Ms] and his conduct after he had laid down what the firm would have been in future, who would have been administrating, what has been decided about [MS], etc. Yesterday it was just a shit show and associates are panicked because all they heard is I will do something rather than I have done something and here is the reason I have done this. What a stupid idea. And that precisely is why he is unfit as a leader. He doesn’t think and he feels proud about this spontaneity of his.
Thankfully my Partner tells me [MS] has full contingency tied up. Fellow kids brace up for a ride, could be bumpy But in the end there would be a high. And remember these scary rides are not a long ride ever. They are a 2 min thrill. This won’t be too long also basis what snapshot I heard about contingency.
What happened yesterday
Chaar Imandaari ke Thekedaaron ne
Ye Chaar phir aayenge
Hamare shavon ko kaandha nahi
Dhakka de
Selfie ko FB pe lagayenge
Besharmon Doob maron
Ek chullu bhar paani me
Mohit tum nayi rachna karo
Hum Tumhare saath hain
Kuch nahin aayega tumharey haath
Rachna karo nayi zaroor
Par dekhna pitogey zaroor
Thaal khaaney ke liye hota hai
Chullu bhar paani doobney ke liya hota hai
Jao tum gand ke saath
Kuch naa ayega tumharey haath.
Kha gaye saath khaane walon ko
In 4 besharam irshyawale imaandaron se
Ram bachaye hum honewalen berozgaron ko
Maali ke sarahne se
Gand me hi jaise khilta kamal hai
Hamari nayi duniya banegi
Mohit ke kushal haaton se
Mohit tum nayi rachna karo
Hum Tumhare saath hain
Dene aa gaye chaar
Sab rahe Hoshiyaar !!!
Waise o saiyaar
Bulaye to kal the tum sabha
To kahe bhage dum dabake
Dikha ke safed dhwaja
Ye bhi yaad rakhna chaaron ke saathi
Ki ye chaar hai vyabhichaari
Inki hai ek hi mansha
Baap se bada rupaiya
While L&L and its counsels’ troubles are not equivalent to the world and its miseries but these 4 are effectively villains in the world of L&L.
Who will hire us in this market?!
Wo din ke jis ka wada hai
Jo lauh-e-azl mein likha hai
Hum Dekhenge!!
In the red corner, RKL. MS in the blue.
Punches were thrown, mostly below the belt.
Referee Bobby who seemed biased was personally invested in the matter.
Some threats, idle, some serious. Rich history between the heavy weights on full display - including Mukesh Ambani, Citibank and Manan Lahoty. Will leave it for everyone to judge who suffers from impostor syndrome and who from a grandiose image of self.
Miss Secretary intervening to make the big boys apologise for swearing on their daughters rang the final bell finishing the match.
What remains to be seen is whether the death knell for L&L has also been rung alongwith it!
On reading RKL's email on firmwide townhall:
5 mins in, after initial COVID references and banalities:
15 mins in, when RKL and Bobby conclusively established Mohit is NOT a co-founder (because that's what everyone wanted to know):
30 mins in, when MS flung back the slime:
45 mins in, after [RKL + Bobby] and Mohit had already called each other liars, players of "cheating games", flung accusations of inferior quality work and alleged blacklisting by a major international group:
Some painful minutes later, when 2 sane junior partners requested them to take RKL v. Mohit offline AND to answer associates' concerns about whether the firm is surviving:
All juniors and associates:
RKL:
All other equity partners:
100 minutes in, when RKL answered questions about the future, by saying He Will Do Something And Personally See That This Firm Is One Of The Best Soon:
120 minutes in, when RKL wished everyone a good weekend:
It’ll add some much needed authenticity to the claims being made here
MS: You take my stake but I'll take yours too. You touch my Clients and I'll duck with you...you sexy(ist) man.
#justiceforSSR
Let's smash the patriarchy.
Me and you!
Let's join our hands for #justiceforMS Vs. #justiceforRKL and see who wins the lockdown series of L&Lbigboss!
FYI I am for #justiceforRKL! So one vote
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first