This interview has been published by Namrata Singh and The SuperLawyer Team
Hello and welcome to our SuperLawyer YouTube channel. Today, we have with us Advocate on Record, Mr. Mayank Sapra, based in Delhi. He primarily practices in the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court, as well as various other tribunals.
His practice areas include arbitration laws, service laws, telecommunication and broadcasting laws, real estate laws, and insolvency laws. He is also empaneled with counsel to secure justice and has represented victims in POCSO matters. We are very thankful to you for accepting our invitation and being here to answer a few questions for our law learners. Welcome and thank you once again.
Thank you so much, ma’am. It’s a real pleasure to be here with you.
I’ll start with my first question. When you decided to become a lawyer, what was your inspiration? And when did you decide to become an Advocate on Record, which undoubtedly is filled with valuable experiences? Could you also share some memorable moments or turning points during your time in college and what inspired you to take such initiatives that have made a name for you?
Well, I’ll start off by saying that I don’t think I’ve taken any initiatives that have made a name for me. But having said that, ma’am, I did not originally want to get into law. Most people from my generation didn’t really consider it. I was a science student preparing for engineering.
However, during my 11th and 12th grades, I realized that not everyone is meant to measure the elasticity of a monkey’s tail. By the time I finished 12th grade, I was quite certain that engineering was not for me.
I had a cousin studying at NUJS, and she encouraged me. My father was convinced that law would be a decent profession to pursue. That’s how I ended up taking the entrance examinations. Initially, my reason for entering law was to prepare for the civil services. It seemed like a natural progression, as studying law would open up options for the civil services exams. But as luck would have it, I lost interest in civil services and ended up at NLUO.
Being at NLUO was a great experience. I felt fortunate to be part of the first batch. Some of my batchmates were among the smartest people I’ve ever met. NLUO wasn’t part of CLAT when I joined, so we had no expectations of getting through. But the idea of coming to a new university and developing a culture of learning became my motivation for joining NLUO.
How has your education shaped your career? I’d love to understand your journey through that.
Honestly, I felt that our teachers were some of the best. Professor Yogesh Pratap Singh, who taught us constitutional law, is now the vice chancellor of NLU Tripura. Dr. Faizan Mustafa was our vice chancellor and is one of the better professors in the country. Professor Abhik Majumdar, currently an associate professor in Goa, was also one of our teachers.
Professor Mustafa did an excellent job of bringing together some of the best professors who knew how to deal with a new law school and students who had no idea how to go about their lives.
We had a professor, Professor Biasa Moharana, who taught sociology. His lessons opened up my understanding of gender equality and disparity. Growing up without a sister, I had little awareness of gender issues. His teachings really helped me understand the other gender and the broader issues of inequality and injustice. This had a major impact on how I approached my career and what I wanted to do.
I never thought about it this way, but now that you ask, I believe my involvement in human rights is partly due to those sociology lessons. They shaped my practice and my approach to law.
Wow! You started seeing things from a gender perspective. Sociology is indeed a big eye-opener for people who haven’t seen the world through the lens of gender inequality. It’s a very touchy subject for me, and you brought it up. So I’ll ask you about your work and representation, including POCSO matters and the NGOs you are involved with around disability laws.
Could you share any particular case or instance where your legal expertise made a difference in someone’s life or the community? Your thought process, shaped in college, has undoubtedly impacted many lives. We would love to hear about any specific instance where your work made a significant difference.
Ma’am, I’m unsure if I should be given the entire credit because, quite frankly, when it comes to human rights, it’s a collective effort. Many people are involved in addressing a particular issue. When I used to assist my senior, Ms. Aparna Bhatt, we worked on a matter in the Supreme Court that was a suo motu recommendation regarding laws pertaining to rape and gang videos. At that time, there were no laws or mechanisms to address these issues, including revenge porn, where people would post unsavory, obnoxious videos to get back at individuals, often without any reason.
Eventually, the government created a mechanism where links could be posted anonymously and taken down within a specific period. The government coordinated with major players like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Microsoft, who were made parties to this initiative. That was a significant point where I felt there was much more to be done.
One particular case that stands out is when I appeared for an NGO called Muskan. The government had allotted them land for creating a residential facility for intellectually disabled children and adults, but when the government changed, they were asked to vacate the land overnight. We approached the Disabilities Commissioner and then went to the High Court, where we secured an order granting us one to one and a half year to find alternative space. This allowed Muskan to plan and accommodate these individuals adequately.
I remember a parent thanking me because Muskan was trying to build a residential facility for their child, who was around 50 years old. The parents, being in their late 70s or 80s with their health issues, were incredibly relieved. This kind of gratitude motivates me to continue working in human rights, even if it’s just a little.
Even that little makes a significant difference. You help change lives, and such contributions bring about substantial societal change. This noble profession directly and indirectly helps many people, something I only realized after pursuing law. On that note, I would like to understand how you diversified your practice into such niche fields like arbitration laws, disability laws, and service matters. How do you navigate these diverse legal practices, and what advice do you have for our learners aspiring to become niche lawyers?
Ma’am, what it effectively means is that I am a jack of all trades and master of none. I know a little about various fields but may not be an expert in any one of them. One reason for this diversification is that I never really chose my path, except for human rights matters, which I consciously pursued.
I went independent after about four years in the profession, and being a first-generation lawyer, I accepted whatever came my way. If someone was satisfied with my work in a particular field, they would recommend me to others. This natural progression led to diversification without any real intention on my part.
I started with Mr. Arun Kumar Varma, a senior advocate specializing in arbitration. Later, when I joined Ms. Aparna Bhatt, I was exposed to human rights and service law. I picked up whatever I could from these experiences to ensure I could do justice to any matter entrusted to me. I won’t promise to win every case, but I’ll certainly try my best not to mess it up. This approach has led to diversification across various areas like insurance law, medical negligence, real estate, and service law. I also consider myself lucky for the opportunities I’ve had.
Your answers lead me to ask a small but significant question: How have you stayed so humble despite your numerous accomplishments? You’ve done so much and have been teaching with LawSikho. How have you sustained your humility and humanity? This is important because success often leads people to lose mindfulness and humility. Your answers reflect a perspective focused on others and a humble acceptance of their views. How have you maintained this grounded, respectful approach, and how can our learners emulate this balance in their own lives?
Ma’am, frankly put, I don’t think this is an achievement of any kind, to be very honest with you. I just like to do my work, that’s how I look at it. Plus, I feel I have a very decent set of friends, juniors, and my wife, who keep reminding me, “Boss, it’s good that you had an excellent day today, but tomorrow somebody might shoot you down.” As my wife likes to put it, there’s no need to feel too proud about it. So, I think that’s what keeps me humble. In my head, I don’t think that whatever little I have today is really an achievement, but I do feel that this profession, and probably doctors as well, is one where people really come to you and entrust their heart and soul with you.
Nobody in India approaches a lawyer because they are happy. They’re in a bad state. When they come to you, they come with a lot of trust and confidence, believing that you can help them with their mess. Now, what happens is they also put you on a pedestal during this entire transaction. So, I feel that, one, it is very important to have people around you who keep reminding you that today is an excellent day, but tomorrow may not be. The second thing is that you need to keep doing that exercise yourself.
Mainly because someone else thinks you argued well, or that this is a good draft, or that you dealt with the client beautifully, or whatever, it shouldn’t make you put yourself on that pedestal. People may want to put you there, and that’s okay because it comes with the territory.
This excellent set of people, including my wonderful friends and, of course, my wife, keep reminding me to stay grounded. For instance, after a great argument, my wife might say, “Great argument! Now go do the laundry.” That’s how it works for me.
This shows how humble and grounded you are. While we were talking about this, I also mentioned that you taught a civil litigation course with us at LawSikho.
Yes.
How was your experience as an educator, and how has that influenced your approach towards advocacy and client representation? When you teach, you interact with students, and their questions are different. What have you learned from that experience?
I’ll let you in on a secret: LawSikho used to pay me to learn. That’s how I looked at it. Teaching that course was one of the better experiences of my career up to this point. You are doing something that will certainly have an impact, and you try your best to make sure it does.
When I started off, I was trying to share my experiences and mistakes, hoping others could learn from them. I have to give credit to the students as well; they were very kind. Many of them were more experienced in life, if not in law. LawSikho has people from diverse fields and backgrounds. Even if they were senior or elder to me, they never made me feel like, “What is this kid going to teach us?”
I started teaching with LawSikho in 2019 when I had only five years in the profession. A lot of credit goes to the students. It also helped me revise my concepts, as I prepared before every class, going through the material again and again. In civil litigation, there was a lot of focus on the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Yes, we are taught CPC and we practice CPC, but at some point, we lose sight of certain crucial aspects, whether it’s the drafting, the law, or the latest developments.
Many people think that because there are no amendments, there are no developments. The fact is, there are developments if you have your eyes open to them. This can be seen in various aspects, like pleadings, written statements, and how different high courts deal with deadlines and procedural rules. Reading to teach others helps me remember and stay updated.
The cherry on top is the students’ questions, which encourage me to read deeper. You might think you can teach a class and be done with it, but a student might ask about a particular aspect, pushing you to prepare harder for next time. That’s why I say LawSikho paid me to train myself, and I was very happy about it.
Wow! What a beautiful explanation about that. Given this kind of explanation, I would really like to understand your perspective on the need for understanding the psychological aspects of any person who comes to you, whether it be for arbitration or anything else, be it company arbitration, IP disputes, or simple arbitration matters within the state. What kind of challenges have you faced? How have you dealt with them? And how has your sociological or psychological understanding helped in that particular work? What would be your suggestions for our learners to understand before choosing that particular field?
So ma’am, most of my arbitration experience is in domestic arbitration. Now, having said that, I don’t think the approach to arbitration is any different from how we approach other cases. The only difference is that you have to be very conscious of the timelines. Because whatever principles apply to regular litigation invariably apply to arbitration. Even if the statute doesn’t apply, the analogous procedures do.
For instance, the Arbitration Act specifically states that the Evidence Act doesn’t apply, but similar procedures obviously do. More often than not, unless the parties agree to bypass a particular procedure, the procedures from the CPC or the evidentiary part of the Indian Evidence Act find their way into arbitrations as well. I feel that arbitration is a double-edged sword.
If you want to misuse it, you can misuse it significantly. If you want to use it to your advantage, you can also do that. Let me demonstrate with an example: in a particular domestic arbitration, and I’m talking about how arbitration is a very evolving subject with frequent amendments. With the latest amendment, we are certain that the arbitrator’s mandate ends after one and a half years, after which you have to move an application under Section 29A. But before that, you could just tell the arbitrator that you couldn’t make it, and some were very lenient. I have been part of arbitrations that have gone on for 12 years, which is far longer than a trial in the first instance would take. We knew this was happening, but after a point, you can’t really do anything about it if someone is misusing it.
People start losing faith in the process. Now, you find that the government has come out with a new policy where they prefer mediation over arbitration, excluding arbitration clauses from any government agreement. This is a significant step indicating a lack of faith in arbitration. If the government says they have no faith, you can imagine the state we are in.
It’s a controversial statement, but it’s the truth. Some arbitrations have been excellent, but it’s crucial that stakeholders do their part. Lawyers need to stop seeking unnecessary adjournments, and arbitrators need to stop granting them. With proper timelines, I think misuse might have come down, but it still happens. So, coming back to your question, it’s important to see what suits you and how you want to use the process. The goal should be to get through it as quickly as possible so you can move to Sections 34 and 37 and the Supreme Court, ensuring the final amount can be realized.
No real psychological change is needed because if you’ve appeared before the concerned arbitrator in the past, you’ll have some idea of how they deal with things. Retired judges often bring their original tendencies to arbitration, whether it’s being particular about procedures or being more flexible.
Some arbitrators state in their orders that all discovery of documents or any other procedures need to be done before the issues are framed, and after that, no further discovery will be allowed. This comes from the CPC. So, having an idea of how the judge used to act can be helpful, but you can gauge it during the arbitration. No special preparation is required in that regard.
That particular expertise you gain while practicing in court definitely helps in arbitrations as well, even in mediations too.
Fair enough. Absolutely. That experience certainly plays a role. No doubt about it.
So, with all that said and done, I would like to understand, rather my question would now be towards the mental health of lawyers. We all know the kind of stressful situations we go through when dealing with clients. How do you actually unwind or refresh yourself from that stress? How do you keep your mental health in check? This has become a very pertinent issue nowadays, especially with budding lawyers who are entering the field and feeling exhausted within a couple of years. What are your suggestions? How do you see yourself taking care of that, and what advice would you give to new entrants in the legal field?
You are absolutely correct that it’s a very important issue that needs addressing. I feel that it’s important at any stage of your career to find some time for yourself. I know it sounds clichéd, but it’s something that has made my life slightly better. It’s not that one isn’t working, but it’s equally important to have 30 to 40 minutes away from Netflix, social media, and other distractions. Personally, going for a walk, a run, or even 10 to 15 minutes of yoga helps me channelize my thoughts.
It’s difficult, no two ways about it. Sometimes you’re shouted at by a judge, bullied by a senior counsel, pressed by the opposition, or criticized by a client. I completely understand all of that. But the only way to get around it is to keep finding time for yourself, at least 30 to 40 minutes daily.
Another thing is taking frequent breaks. It helps if you have a travel-friendly partner. I try to plan trips every three or four months with my wife, who is great at organizing them. These breaks, even if just for three or four days, help you come back with a fresh mind. Finding time for yourself daily doesn’t come easily. For someone like me, it didn’t come easily. Even now, I struggle to find 40 minutes daily, but thinking along these lines encourages progress and helps maintain mental health.
It is so true. The way you are explaining it definitely makes sense. Keeping all that in mind, recently, there have been talks around the legal fraternity worldwide about technology and digital innovation taking over all fields of work. How has technology helped you build your practice? Is it friendly for you, or do you struggle with it? If you haven’t struggled, how has technology helped you? How do you see the future, and what is your prediction for the future work of lawyers? This will help our learners understand new fields they can explore or reach out for.
Ma’am, I’m unsure about the various aspects or new work that will emerge, but I can speak about what we currently have.
I’ll address this question in two parts. First, how I feel technology has helped us. Second, with the advent of technology, what new laws have come in that will likely generate new work. So first things first, ma’am, I feel it’s very important to have an open mind to changing technology.
Credit to my junior colleagues who keep insisting, because I’m fairly old school in my head. My problem was that I could not work without a physical copy. My junior at that time would come along with me and she would only have her laptop.
This is post-2020. In my head, I was still using the hard copy. So at some point, it really made me feel that I would have to get into all of this. It’s just that because I’m not starting, there is that initial sort of lethargy or inertia that keeps you from moving towards that goal.
So I think, of late, I have been able to reduce paper consumption. I’m very happy about that. And yes, it absolutely helps because I’m not reliant on anybody to get me the files. When the matter is going to reach, I have the files on my laptop and I can easily use that, or maybe an iPad or whatever.
But it does take a little time. I’ll be very candid—I struggle with it even now. But it’s only when one keeps working on this that you will actually end up reaching there. It’s not about flashing a laptop or an iPad in the board and saying, “Okay, you know, I have something like this.” But then you see what happens is that when you see people who are older than you, people who are far more experienced and are more likely to be old school, dealing with technology in such a brilliant and seamless manner, you know this for a fact that the only thing stopping you is probably that lack of effort.
So I feel that part is very important. It’s a mental block that needs to be overcome to make space for technology. And I think it makes life easier. It absolutely does. Because I was telling my junior colleague the other day that we’ve seen times, and people who are senior to me have seen even worse times, where people used to keep stones in Delhi, in the Supreme Court. They would keep stones just so that their identification could be marked where they would be in the line of filing.
By the time I came into the profession, the thing was that you had to stand in the line—keeping the stone was not going to help. So the times were fairly flexible, and you had to keep making changes and all of that. But now we just sit in our respective homes, make changes, and file online.
So it’s obviously become more convenient. That, I feel, is a very, very happy change as far as technology is concerned. Now, coming to the second part of it: technology and the growth of technology are also a double-edged sword because there are privacy issues that have cropped up.
When the world was talking about GDPR some years back, India has now finally come up with the Data Protection Act, the Personal Data Protection Act, I believe it’s called.
So I think if somebody is really interested, if somebody really finds the work being generated, I think that is going to be a very, very decent area to specialize in. If I could find the time, I would certainly want to go through that Act and maybe figure out if there is some work there for me.
See, the thing is that some time back, we used to only talk about movies from a very cinematographic point of view. Now, as it stands today, we are dealing with OTTs. And there is a lot of work being generated there too because a lot of times people ask whether there is a requirement for a government body or a regulator to step in to say whether there is some sort of regulatory mechanism required in OTT. I believe at some point it will happen.
But as it stands today, I feel it’s working on a very self-regulation mechanism. So, even that, I feel, in times to come, will have some work. That’s the length and breadth of my thought process at this point.
It’s actually the Digital Personal Data Protection Act. I’m pretty sure that you will do wonders once you get to read it and you’ll get good clients as well. The reason is I am doing all that, so I know about it, and actually, we have to follow what is going on in the digital world as well. And the kind of practice that you have, it is going to be very helpful in digital and cyberspace as well.
Yes.
It has been a very candid interview. You were so clear about your thoughts. I was really amazed that you gave some thoughts about all these aspects of judges, how arbitration works. It’s not easy for lawyers to be so open and so clear about these matters, admitting that they are bringing their mindset to arbitration as well.
It has affected arbitration, but it has been a beautiful experience to have you here, Mayank Ji. It’s absolutely enlightening. And thank you for accepting our invitation.
Likewise, ma’am. Thank you so much.
Get in touch with Mayank Sapra-
