This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team

What motivated you to pursue a career in law, and what factors influenced your decision to enter this field?
While I was a PCM (Science with Mathematics) student in school, I always knew that engineering or any science-related field wasn’t my calling. At the same time, my family never imposed their aspirations on me, thus allowing me to focus on what truly resonated with me.
What stood out to me about the law was its dynamic nature and its potential to impact society. During my senior year of school, I had the opportunity to meet one of my father’s friends, now a reputed senior advocate. He shared how the profession is not just about arguing cases in court but about shaping the law, resolving disputes, and bringing meaningful changes to people’s lives. “Curiosity, consistency, and determination,” he said, “are the pillars of success in the legal field.” Those words struck a chord with me and broadened my understanding of what a career in law could entail. Choosing law was not just about ambition; it was about aligning my interests with my strengths. I’ve always been drawn to structured reasoning, persuasive communication, and finding creative solutions to challenges.
Looking back, my decision to pursue law feels both deliberate and intuitive, shaped by personal experiences, influential encounters, and the freedom to chart my own course. It wasn’t a single moment but a combination of factors that made me realize that law was where I could thrive and make a meaningful impact.
You went on to pursue your LL.M. in Dispute Resolution from the Straus Institute at Pepperdine University, California (2015), where you were awarded the prestigious Straus Fellowship Award of USD 25,000. What was the driving force behind choosing this institution for your Masters?
During my bachelors in law, I had the privilege of interning with Mr. Veeraraghavan Inbavijayan, one of the foremost arbitrators in the field, who became both a mentor and an influential figure in my professional growth. This internship, although conducted online in 2013—when digital internships were not as widely recognized as they are today—was an incredibly rewarding experience. Mr. Inbavijayan tasked me with researching and preparing detailed notes on various case laws pertaining to construction, maritime, and commercial disputes, areas in which he was actively serving as an arbitrator. The real value of this internship came not just from the legal research, but from the unique opportunity to observe the intricate process of arbitration from a neutral, impartial perspective.
This exposure gave me invaluable insights into how arbitration operates as a mechanism for dispute resolution. What stood out to me the most was the flexibility inherent in the process, which allows parties to resolve conflicts in a more streamlined, cost-effective manner compared to traditional litigation. The freedom arbitration affords to the parties, especially when it comes to choosing the governing laws and procedural rules, deeply fascinated me. This flexibility allows for the customization of the proceedings, making it an appealing choice for complex, multi-jurisdictional disputes that require tailored solutions. The dynamic nature of arbitration, coupled with its efficiency, was exactly what I was looking for in the field of law.
It was during this time that I became certain that arbitration and dispute resolution were the areas I wanted to specialize in. This passion led me to pursue an LL.M. in Dispute Resolution from the Straus Institute at Pepperdine University in California. I chose Pepperdine not only because of its reputation as a leading institution in the field of dispute resolution and its leading ranking, but also because of its practical, hands-on approach to teaching and its strong emphasis on international arbitration and resolving disputes. The Straus Institute’s unique curriculum, combined with its faculty of esteemed professionals who have made significant contributions to the field, made it the ideal place for me to further my knowledge and skill set. The opportunity to study under experts in the field, while also engaging with a diverse, international student body, further solidified my decision. My experience at PepperdineUniversity, particularly being awarded the prestigious Straus Fellowship Award of USD 25,000, gave me both the academic foundation and the practical tools to excel in this field. It was a pivotal step in shaping my career as a dispute resolution professional, and I look back on it as one of the most transformative periods of my professional life.
During your early career, what valuable insights did you gain from your internships in Dubai, particularly regarding international arbitration? How were they different from the law firms in India?
During the early stages of my career, I had the opportunity to intern at several prominent law firms in Dubai, which provided me with invaluable insights into international arbitration, particularly in the context of the Middle East and cross border disputes. These internships were pivotal in shaping my understanding of the practical aspects of arbitration and the unique challenges faced by practitioners in a globalized legal environment.
One of the most significant takeaways from my time in Dubai was the exposure to the complexity of multi-jurisdictional arbitration cases. Unlike India, where many arbitration matters are still in the process of evolving, Dubai is known for being a hub for international arbitration due to its strategic location and modern infrastructure. The Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) and the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) offer a dynamic and highly regulated environment for resolving disputes that involve parties from different legal systems. I had the opportunity to work on cases involving international commercial disputes, construction contracts, and trade agreements, often involving parties from diverse backgrounds and legal traditions. This taught me the importance of understanding and navigating the cultural, legal, and procedural differences that impact the way arbitration is conducted in different parts of the world.
The most striking difference I noticed between law firms in Dubai and those in India was the level of global exposure and the emphasis on handling cross border disputes. In Dubai, arbitration is seen as a preferred method of dispute resolution, and the legal landscape is highly international, with professionals from all over the world practising together. This globalised atmosphere made it clear that international arbitration requires not just expertise in local law but also a deep understanding of international conventions, and the nuances of various national legal systems. The law firms in Dubai, where I interned, placed a significant emphasis on teamwork and collaboration with international partners, which helped me develop a more holistic view of the legal process.
In contrast, the firms in India, while still handling complex arbitration cases, were more focused on domestic laws and issues that were more localised, particularly due to the legal framework in India being still relatively in its development phase compared to more established jurisdictions. Arbitration in India often involved navigating a system that had a more procedural and statutory focus, with a stronger emphasis on litigation and court involvement in certain cases. This made the experience in Dubai refreshing, as I was exposed to a more streamlined and flexible approach, where the role of arbitration centres and the autonomy of the arbitrators were much more pronounced.
Overall, these internships in Dubai not only broadened my knowledge of international arbitration but also deepened my appreciation for the importance of adaptability, cultural sensitivity, and global legal practices in today’s interconnected world. The exposure to both global legal practices in Dubai and the evolving legal landscape in India has given me a comprehensive understanding of how arbitration can function on both local and international stages.
How was your experience at Pepperdine University, California? Were there any other courses which were not strictly related to arbitration? How was the experience of learning different from the law school you attended in India?
My time at Pepperdine University in California was an enriching and transformative experience. Studying at the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution exposed me to a world of legal education that was dynamic, interdisciplinary, and practical. One of the courses which was not strictly arbitration related, and which I truly enjoyed was ‘Mediation – Theory and Practice’, which was taught by one of the most reputed professors at Pepperdine. The professor’s expertise and real-world experience made the class not only intellectually stimulating but also deeply insightful. I came to appreciate how mediation, as a dispute resolution process, can often be more valuable than arbitration, especially in cases where preserving relationships and finding mutually beneficial solutions are paramount. While arbitration is structured and often adversarial, mediation allows the parties to have greater control over the outcome. In mediation, the role of the mediator is not to impose a decision but to facilitate a dialogue that helps the parties reach their own resolution. This process, which emphasizes collaboration, negotiation, and empathy, is especially valuable in disputes involving long-term relationships, such as family businesses or international partnerships. I found that in many cases, mediation can help preserve ongoing relationships that could be irrevocably damaged through arbitration or litigation. For example, in a commercial dispute between two family-owned businesses, mediation could have been a better approach to help the parties maintain their business relationships while resolving their legal issues amicably.
Another course that had a profound impact on me was Cross-Cultural Conflict and Dispute Resolution, which taught me the importance of understanding how culture influences the way people approach conflict and resolution. This course was particularly relevant in the context of international arbitration, where the parties often come from diverse cultural backgrounds. I learned that cultural differences can significantly impact negotiation styles, communication, and even perceptions of fairness. For instance, I discovered that in some cultures, maintaining harmony and avoiding confrontation is more important than directly addressing the issue, while in others, a more direct, assertive approach is preferred. A great example of this is the difference in conflict resolution approaches between Western and Eastern cultures. In the West, particularly in the United States, a direct, problem-solving approach to conflict is common, with a focus on resolving issues quickly and efficiently. In contrast, many Asian cultures, such as those in Japan and China, place a higher value on maintaining face and relationships, often preferring a more indirect, collaborative approach to resolving disputes.
The educational experience at Pepperdine was vastly different from the law school I attended in India. In India, while the legal education is rigorous, it tends to be more focused on theoretical learning and the application of Indian law, with a strong emphasis on preparing students for the Indian legal system. The approach at Pepperdine, on the other hand, was much more interactive, practical, and globally oriented. The emphasis on skills like negotiation, mediation, and understanding cross-cultural differences was something that added a whole new dimension to my legal education. I appreciated the interactive classroom environment, where we engaged in simulations, role playing exercises, and discussions with peers from diverse legal backgrounds. This collaborative learning approach was a refreshing change from the more traditional, lecture-based style that I was accustomed to in India.
Moreover, the diverse student body at Pepperdine University, representing various nationalities and legal systems, provided a unique opportunity to learn not just from professors but also from peers. This multicultural environment enriched my understanding of international dispute resolution and made me more aware of the complexities involved when resolving conflicts between parties from different legal traditions and cultural contexts.
What motivated you to establish your independent litigation practice in 2020, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic? How did the transition from large firms to independent practice unfold, and how did you manage the shift?
Since the beginning of my law career, I was certain that I wanted to eventually establish my independent practice. While working with several reputed law firms and distinguished lawyers, I gained invaluable insights into the intricacies of legal practice, but I always envisioned carving my own path. By 2020, I felt confident that the time was right to take this step.
Launching an independent practice during the COVID-19 pandemic presented its own set of challenges. The legal landscape had shifted dramatically, with virtual hearings becoming the norm and access to clients and courts being heavily restricted. Yet, I saw this as an opportunity to adapt, innovate, and build a practice rooted in resilience and client-centric solutions.
I distinctly remember my first case under my independent practice—a matrimonial dispute. A wife approached me after her husband had filed a divorce petition on the grounds of cruelty and had even gone so far as to challenge the legitimacy of their child. It was an emotionally charged and legally complex case, especially since the opposing counsel presented substantial evidence to support their claims.
With a methodical approach, I focused on crafting a strategy that emphasized the inconsistencies in their arguments while drawing attention to the factual and emotional dimensions of my client’s situation. After meticulous research, evidence collation, and persuasive arguments, we succeeded in securing reasonable maintenance for both the wife and child. Additionally, we were able to successfully defend the allegations regarding the child’s legitimacy as well as the grounds he had taken for filing the divorce petition. Eventually, the parties resolved their differences amicably and opted for a mutual consent divorce.
That case was pivotal for me—not just because it was my first as an independent lawyer, but also because it reinforced the realization that independent practice requires a broad-based approach. While arbitration had always been a key focus for me, this experience made me realize the importance of diversifying my areas of expertise to serve a wider spectrum of clients. The transition from large firms to independent practice wasn’t without its hurdles. From setting up an office and building a network of clients to manage administrative responsibilities single handedly, it required immense dedication and adaptability. However, the sense of autonomy and the ability to directly impact clients’ lives made the journey truly fulfilling.
Could you describe some of the arbitration cases you handled in your experience over the years?
Throughout my legal career, I have had the opportunity to handle a diverse array of arbitration cases spanning commercial, maritime, construction, and other specialized disputes. My work has taken me across various jurisdictions and arbitration forums, including proceedings governed by the rules of SIAC, LCIA, ICC, and DIAC, among others.
One notable segment of my practice involves construction disputes, which often require a deep understanding of technical issues, contractual frameworks, and project-specific challenges. Many of these disputes are governed by FIDIC contracts, where issues such as delays, price variation, cost overruns, defective work claims, and contract terminations frequently arise. For instance, I successfully represented a client in a complex arbitration concerning a multi million-dollar infrastructure project. The dispute revolved around delay penalties and other related issues and allegations under the FIDIC Silver Book. My approach combined a meticulous analysis of technical reports with a robust presentation of the contract’s terms, ultimately securing a favourable arbitral award for my client.
Another compelling case I worked on involved an international arbitration under LCIA Rules. This dispute was unique, revolving around the ownership and authenticity of a painting by a renowned artist. It was a fascinating blend of legal and art historical issues, requiring close collaboration with art experts, authentication agencies, and valuation professionals. Navigating through conflicting expert testimonies, I was able to establish the authenticity of the artwork and protect my client’s ownership rights, leading to a successful resolution of the dispute.
My experience also extends to maritime arbitration cases, where I have dealt with disputes involving charter party agreements, cargo claims, and shipbuilding contracts. One such case involved a dispute over demurrage claims under a charter party agreement, where my ability to interpret contractual clauses and maritime regulations proved critical in achieving a favourable award for my client. In addition to these, I have handled several high-stakes commercial arbitrations, often involving breaches of contract, shareholder disputes, and joint venture agreements. Each case has contributed to my understanding of arbitration as a dynamic and multifaceted process. I remain committed to delivering effective and pragmatic solutions for my clients in this ever-evolving field.
Having handled various matrimonial cases in your independent practice, what significant trends or changes have you noticed in matrimonial laws?
In my experience handling a wide array of matrimonial cases, one of the most frequent inquiries from clients revolves around questions like, “Do I have to pay alimony to my wife?”, “Can I file for divorce?”, “How much maintenance can I expect?”, etc. While these questions are valid, the answer is often one of the most quintessential lawyerly responses: “It depends.” Matrimonial law does not operate on a one-size-fits-all formula. Alimony, maintenance, and divorce settlements hinge on a variety of factors, including but not limited to: The financial standing and status of the families involved, The standard of living enjoyed by the couple during the marriage, The financial needs of the wife and children (if any), The income sources and earning capacities of both parties., Educational qualifications and professional opportunities are available to both.
It is crucial to emphasize that just because a wife earns more than her husband, it does not automatically disqualify her from seeking maintenance. The courts adopt a balanced approach, taking into account the overarching principles of fairness and justice. One recurring question I encounter, particularly from male clients, is: “Why are matrimonial laws so wife-centric?” This perception is shaped, in part, by social media narratives/influencers that often paint a one dimensional picture. It’s important to understand that laws like the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act are designed to address systemic and pervasive issues of abuse that continue to exist across many regions in India, especially in non-urban areas where such incidents frequently go unreported.
At the same time, I acknowledge that not every case filed by a wife is genuine. Instances of misuse of these laws do occur, leading to false allegations against husbands. However, this does not undermine the broader objective of such legislation. Trusting the judiciary to scrutinize and differentiate between genuine and false claims is imperative. A case that exemplifies this nuanced approach involved a husband with negligible income compared to his wife, who was a high earning professional. Despite the apparent disparity, the court granted maintenance to the husband (and not the wife!) under the Hindu Marriage Act, recognizing his genuine financial dependence and needs. The takeaway here is that matrimonial disputes are inherently complex, and the determination of alimony, maintenance, or grounds for divorce varies significantly from case to case. It is always advisable for individuals to consult a qualified lawyer for tailored legal advice, rather than relying solely on information found online or anecdotal accounts.
Reflecting on your journey, what advice would you offer to students and/or young lawyers who are just starting out in their legal journey?
A piece of advice I’d offer to young lawyers and students embarking on their legal careers is this: “Follow the law, not the money.” In the initial stages, particularly in litigation, the financial rewards may seem modest compared to other legal fields. But the real value lies in the experience you gain, the lessons you learn, and the skills you develop during these formative years. Litigation demands hard work, patience, and resilience. You may take on cases that don’t pay much, or even refer cases to seniors or colleagues, but ensure that you remain actively involved. Follow up, understand the intricacies of each matter, and use every case as a learning opportunity. Remember, the more cases you immerse yourself in, the sharper and more seasoned you’ll become as a litigator.
I was once told: “Curiosity, consistency, and determination are the pillars of success in the legal field.” These words have stayed with me throughout my career. Stay curious, delve into the nuances of the law. Be consistent, work steadily, even when success seems distant. And most importantly, remain determined, litigation is not an easy path, but it is one that rewards those who persevere.
So, to all young lawyers: don’t give up. The early years may feel overwhelming, but with time, effort, and a genuine passion for the law, you will find your place in this profession. Success in litigation is not measured overnight; it’s a journey of constant growth, built one case, one argument, and one lesson at a time.
Get in touch with Kunal Kumar –
