This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
With a specialized academic background in Intellectual Property Law and experience in arbitration, what first sparked your interest in these fields, and how did you chart your path toward building a niche?
My interest in Intellectual Property (IP) Law and Arbitration developed early during my legal education, as I observed how legal structures could facilitate innovation and enable efficient dispute resolution. The interplay of creativity, commerce, and protection within IP law captivated me, while arbitration appealed to my inclination toward structured, time-bound mechanisms for conflict resolution. Recognizing their growing relevance in a globalized, technology-driven world, I pursued a specialization in Intellectual Property Law and complemented it with a Diploma in Cyber Law and a Diploma in Alternate Dispute Resolution. Early in my career, I had the opportunity to work on both IP-centric transactions and arbitration matters, particularly for technology and media clients. This exposure helped me build core competence in these areas. Over the years, I have advised and represented clients in complex IP disputes, as well as high-value arbitrations, thereby developing a niche, multidisciplinary litigation and advisory practice.
With over 12 years of diverse litigation experience across multiple domains, what inspired you to establish your own independent practice? What were some of the initial challenges you faced, and how did you overcome them?
The decision to establish my independent practice was a natural evolution in my professional journey. After years of working with reputed law firms and handling high-stakes litigation and arbitration, I felt the need to channel my experience into building a practice that reflects my values and strategic approach.
Presently, I am regularly engaged by clients and fellow advocates for representation and strategic assistance in matters before the Supreme Court of India, the High Court of Delhi, the NCLT/NCLAT, NCDRC, and Arbitral Tribunals. My practice spans a wide range of civil, commercial, and arbitration matters, with a strong emphasis on tailoring strategy to suit the forum and the nature of the dispute.
That said, the transition to independent practice came with its own set of challenges, particularly as a first-generation lawyer. Unlike those with family legacies in the profession, I did not inherit a chamber, a network, or a ready set of clients. Every brief, every introduction, every recommendation had to be earned through consistent effort and credibility.
One of the most immediate hurdles was building a reliable and cohesive team that aligned with the standards and expectations I had set. Another was gaining visibility and establishing credibility in a competitive legal ecosystem where institutional names often carry weight. Financial unpredictability, especially during the initial phase, was a very real concern.
But persistence, the trust of long standing clients, and the support of peers in the profession helped me navigate those early hurdles. Looking back, the absence of a safety net made the process harder, but it also made every milestone more meaningful.
You’ve represented various corporates and associations before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. What are some key strategic and procedural considerations when preparing matters for the Apex Court?
As an Advocate-on-Record, I am closely involved in ensuring procedural compliance at every stage, whether it is curating the record, certifying pleadings, or meeting filing timelines. The smallest procedural oversight can delay a matter or, worse, affect its prospects, so attention to detail is non-negotiable.
Strategically, it’s essential to identify and frame substantial questions of law that warrant the Court’s attention, especially when seeking special leave. The task is not just to argue well but to demonstrate why the matter deserves to be heard at the apex level. This often involves a careful study of precedents, anticipating the judicial approach, and distilling complex factual matrices into crisp legal propositions.
When representing corporates or industry bodies, an added layer of responsibility arises, ensuring that litigation strategy is aligned with their internal governance, compliance protocols, and long-term commercial outlook. In such cases, the objective is not only to secure relief but to do so in a manner that reinforces institutional credibility and legal preparedness.
Ultimately, preparation for the Supreme Court is not about volume of material, but the clarity of thought and brevity in presentation. Every word counts and every argument must serve a precise purpose.
With the rapid rise of technology including AI and digital platforms, how do you see the landscape of dispute resolution changing, particularly in the realms of IP and commercial litigation?
The rapid evolution of technology, particularly artificial intelligence, and digital platforms, is fundamentally reshaping the legal landscape. In the realms of commercial litigation and arbitration, we are already seeing an increased reliance on digital evidence, virtual hearings, and AI-enabled legal research tools.
In the context of intellectual property, technology has created both opportunities and complex challenges. Issues like digital piracy, AI-generated works, and automated infringement detection demand legal interpretations that go beyond traditional IP frameworks. The pace of innovation often outstrips legislative response, placing greater responsibility on lawyers and Courts to bridge that gap with well-reasoned, forward-looking arguments.
From a procedural standpoint, the integration of e-filing systems, hybrid hearings, and digital evidence management has significantly improved access to justice and case efficiency. These changes, initially introduced out of necessity during the pandemic, have now become institutional features, and rightly so.
Looking ahead, I believe technology will not just augment dispute resolution but redefine it. Online dispute resolution (ODR), smart contracts, and AI-assisted decision-making are likely to become more mainstream. For practitioners, this underscores the need to stay agile, continually upgrade their understanding of emerging technologies, and reimagine advocacy in a digital-first environment.
Having said that, while AI can assist in streamlining legal tasks, it cannot substitute the nuanced reasoning, ethical judgment, and strategic insight that human intelligence brings to the legal process. Law is not only about rules, it is about context, persuasion, and the ability to interpret human conduct. These are areas where human advocates remain irreplaceable. It will likely take considerable time, and fundamental shifts in legal philosophy, before AI can meaningfully replicate that depth of analysis and discretion. For Advocates today, the challenge lies in integrating new-age tools without losing the craft of advocacy.
In advising international clients, especially in technology-related matters, how do you navigate cross-border legal systems? Do you feel India’s evolving legal framework is now aligned with global standards in this space?
Advising international clients requires not just legal expertise but also cultural and regulatory sensitivity. I ensure that our advisory is aligned with both Indian legal requirements and the client’s jurisdictional obligations. This involves collaborating with foreign counsel, staying updated on global developments, and contextualizing advice for transnational operations. India’s legal framework, particularly in arbitration, data protection, fintech, and IP, is increasingly converging with global best practices, though there is room for further harmonization. With the evolving jurisprudence in arbitration law, cyber and tech law, India is on the right path to becoming a robust jurisdiction for global business.
Having handled numerous high-stakes arbitrations, what are the key challenges you’ve encountered? In your opinion, how is Alternate Dispute Resolution shaping the future of dispute resolution in India?
Arbitration, particularly in sectors like construction, infrastructure, and real estate, often brings with it layered complexities, voluminous records, overlapping issues, technical details, and multi-party coordination. One of the foremost challenges I have encountered is ensuring that the presentation of evidence remains streamlined and digestible for the arbitral tribunal, especially when dealing with expert reports, engineering documents, or financial data spanning several years.
Coordinating with technical experts, be it structural engineers, accountants, or valuation professionals, also demands careful calibration. Their inputs must be integrated in a legally coherent manner while preserving clarity. Additionally, procedural inefficiencies, such as fragmented hearings, delayed cross-examinations, or challenges in securing timely interim relief, can dilute the effectiveness of arbitration if not proactively managed.
Enforcement remains another practical concern. Winning an award is one part of the battle; ensuring its timely execution, particularly in cross-border contexts, can often test both patience and strategy.
That said, I firmly believe that Alternate Dispute Resolution is no longer just an alternative, it is becoming central to the evolution of commercial justice in India. With institutional arbitration gaining maturity, greater judicial support for party autonomy, and statutory amendments aimed at reducing timelines, ADR is now seen not only as a faster route to resolution but also as one that offers confidentiality, flexibility, and sector-specific expertise.
In my own practice, I have seen clients grow increasingly open to ADR mechanisms, not only for dispute resolution but also for pre-dispute risk management. The shift is encouraging and, in many ways, necessary for a modern, efficient legal ecosystem.
What guidance would you offer to young lawyers who aim to develop a multifaceted practice in litigation and advisory, especially in specialized areas such as intellectual property and arbitration?
Young lawyers have more access today than ever, judgments are online, mentors are more approachable, and the legal market is broader. But with this comes pressure to specialize early.
My advice is to not to rush it. Spend your first few years building a strong base helps immensely. Attend court. Observe. Take notes. I still remember sitting in the back row of a courtroom during my early days, watching a senior counsel argue a simple interim application. The way he positioned facts, paused, and responded taught me more than any classroom could. That moment stayed with me.
Do not hesitate to ask questions or seek feedback. Invest in courses, read beyond textbooks, and keep your curiosity alive. Most importantly, find mentors who do not just teach the law, but help shape how you think. I have been lucky in that regard and I try to offer the same to juniors in my chamber.
Honestly, there is no one-size-fits-all formula. But if you stay honest with your work, remain open to learning, and surround yourself with people who push you to grow, the law has a way of rewarding your efforts.
Being enrolled as an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court is a significant professional milestone. How has this achievement influenced your practice, and what additional responsibilities does it entail?
Becoming an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court has been one of the most defining moments of my professional journey. It has brought me honor and repute. It is both a privilege and a significant responsibility, one that has deepened my involvement in constitutional, commercial, and regulatory litigation at the highest level.
The designation has brought with it the ability to independently file and conduct matters before the Supreme Court, which naturally expands both the scope and depth of my practice. It has also instilled a heightened sense of accountability, not just to clients, but to the institution of the Court itself. Every filing under my name carries the weight of professional integrity and procedural precision.
As a first-generation practitioner, the journey to clearing the Advocate-on-Record examination and earning the trust of clients in this capacity has been particularly meaningful. The recognition has not only enhanced my standing within the legal fraternity but has also opened doors to more complex and high-stakes litigation assignments, often requiring strategic foresight, coordination with senior counsel, and deep research.
Managing a demanding legal practice, especially as an AOR, can be intense. How do you maintain personal well-being amidst professional commitments? What does unwinding and relaxation look like for you?
Managing a demanding legal practice, especially in the role of an Advocate-on-Record, requires more than just professional discipline. It calls for conscious balance, perspective, and self-care. The pace can be relentless, with high expectations and tight timelines, but I have learned over the years that sustainability in this profession depends on how well you manage your energy, not just your time.
The unwavering support of my family has been the bedrock of that balance. Their patience and encouragement, especially during peak court seasons or when critical matters are listed back-to-back, provide a sense of stability that anchors me amidst the intensity of litigation. Knowing that there is understanding and reassurance outside the courtroom makes the pressures inside it more manageable.
I also try to be deliberate about switching off. Reading, particularly outside of law, is something I turn to regularly. Even a short walk or a quiet break during the day can bring a surprising amount of clarity. Setting boundaries around work hours and consciously unplugging when possible has helped me stay mentally alert and emotionally steady.
Ultimately, it is the combined support system at home and at the workplace that sustains consistent performance and personal fulfillment in this profession.
Get in touch with Ankit Chaturvedi –
