This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
What inspired your decision to pursue law, especially coming from an Army background? Was there a particular experience or influence that sparked your interest in the legal profession and if not how did it develop?
Being from a Defence family, I grew up observing my father’s unwavering commitment to discipline, integrity, and justice—not just for himself, but for those around him. When I was in Class 12, he was posted in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, where he was entrusted with handling discipline and vigilance matters, including the oversight of legal cases. I often saw him engage with lawyers and Central Government Standing Counsels, and listening to those discussions sparked my initial interest in the legal field.
Another significant source of inspiration came from our family legacy. My great-grandfather was a barrister trained in England and was considered one of the most affluent and sought-after lawyers of his time. Stories of his work, often narrated by my father, filled me with pride and deepened my fascination with the legal profession. My father’s own experience in the Defence Forces had shown him the transformative power of law in shaping society. His belief in its impact and his encouragement played a crucial role in motivating me to consider a career in law.
Once in law school, I made it a point to seek practical exposure early on. I interned at various law firms across both corporate and litigation domains to gain a hands-on understanding of the profession. These experiences were eye-opening and shifted my perception of law from a purely academic subject to a dynamic and impactful vocation. I found particular excitement in applying legal principles to real-life situations and was deeply inspired by watching seasoned advocates present arguments in court.
This exposure transformed my attitude toward the field. I began to genuinely enjoy my studies and took part in moot court competitions, debates, and academic research with renewed enthusiasm. What started as a reluctant compromise gradually evolved into a meaningful and fulfilling calling.
Looking back, choosing law has been one of the most rewarding decisions of my life. If given the chance to choose again, I wouldn’t hesitate to take the same path.
You pursued your LL.M. in International Commercial and Corporate Laws at Queen Mary University of London, one of the leading programs in commercial laws and arbitration. How did that academic experience sharpen your legal reasoning, and how do you integrate that international perspective when handling domestic disputes in India?
Before pursuing an LL.M., I spent four years working in the dispute resolution team at Wadia Ghandy & Co., Delhi. During my tenure, I handled a diverse range of commercial and corporate matters, albeit from a dispute resolution perspective. Working on high-stake and complex cases made me acutely aware of a gap in my understanding of commercial and corporate law—my knowledge, while broad based, lacked the depth I aspired to achieve. This realization prompted my decision to pursue an LL.M., with the aim of gaining a more nuanced and in-depth understanding of this domain.
My longstanding interest in commercial and corporate law stems from a deep-rooted passion for commerce and business which further motivated me to pursue an LL.M. where I could experience the intersection of law and business, taught by some of the most respected professors in the field. In addition to enhancing my legal understanding, I was also drawn by the opportunity for international exposure and the chance to engage with a truly global legal perspective.
Undoubtedly, the LL.M. expanded my intellectual horizons and significantly deepened my understanding of international commercial laws. Exposure to an international legal framework offered a broader context and allowed for a more well-rounded grasp of the subject matter. My coursework included modules such as Mergers (a court-approved process in India), Acquisitions and Takeovers, International Commercial Law, Trial Advocacy, Regulation of Financial Markets, Conflict of Laws, and International Commercial Arbitration, among others. I had the privilege of learning from world-renowned professors like Mr. Stavros Brekoulakis and Ms. Rosa Lastra, both recognized authorities in their respective fields, as well as attending guest lectures delivered by distinguished legal luminaries.
What particularly stood out to me was the pedagogical approach of the LL.M. program. The teaching was rooted in exploring the “why” behind laws—their purpose, evolution, and the jurisprudential rationale—rather than simply focusing on the “what,” which tends to be the predominant style in Indian legal education. This method fosters greater intellectual flexibility and clarity, which I find immensely valuable, even when working on domestic legal matters, as the foundational legal principles often remain consistent.
To illustrate, consider the field of international arbitration, which has gained significant prominence in recent years and is now considered a cornerstone for lawyers dealing with cross-border disputes. The procedural frameworks of leading arbitral institutions as well as our own Arbitration Act are grounded in the UNCITRAL Model Law. Being taught by professors with direct experience in shaping and applying these frameworks offers invaluable insight—something that an LL.M. program uniquely provides and therefore applying this knowledge in the arbitrations which I am involved in proves to be highly beneficial.
With 9 years of post-qualification experience in dispute resolution and arbitration, what originally drew you to this field? What have been the most defining moments or lessons that shaped your professional approach within high-stakes litigation environments?
During law school, I explored a broad spectrum of internships across both corporate and litigation domains. These included stints under senior counsels, litigation lawyers, and prominent law firms. By the end of my academic journey, I found myself increasingly inclined towards litigation. However, I remained cautious about fully committing, having been advised by several mentors about the profession’s slow initial progression and modest early rewards.
In pursuit of clarity, I joined ASP Advocates—a full-service law firm led by my mentor, Mr. Abhishek Seth. He graciously offered me a legal position where I engaged in a balanced mix of litigation and corporate transactional work. My time at ASP proved instrumental in shaping my professional outlook. I found myself especially drawn to courtroom proceedings, legal drafting, and the application of legal principles to complex factual scenarios. These experiences sharpened my analytical thinking and compelled me to approach problems creatively and critically. After more than a year at ASP, I was certain that litigation was the path I wanted to pursue.
With a clearer sense of direction, I joined the Delhi office of Wadia Ghandy & Co., where I was exposed to a more demanding and dynamic litigation environment. I worked on a wide range of matters—from high-stakes disputes to those with relatively lower stakes. Interestingly, I came to appreciate that it is often the smaller matters that truly shape a lawyer’s core skills. While high-stake cases typically involve a team of lawyers—where one’s role may be limited—smaller matters offer greater responsibility, hands-on experience, and opportunities to build courtroom confidence. I strongly believe in regularly taking up such cases, along with engaging in pro bono work, both of which are essential for holistic professional growth.
That said, the value of working in high-stakes litigation cannot be overstated. At Wadia, I was fortunate to be involved in a landmark constitutional matter referred to a nine-judge bench. The case presented intricate questions of constitutional law and involved collaboration with some of the most respected senior advocates before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. It demanded intense preparation—multiple strategy conferences, long hours of research, and detailed analysis of extensive judicial precedents. The experience, while intellectually demanding, was equally enriching. I learned through observation—how senior counsels structured their arguments, interpreted precedents, and framed issues strategically to serve the client’s interests. Beyond the legal learning, such work cultivates discipline, resilience, and a deep respect for the value of time—all vital qualities for a successful litigator.
As my tenure at Wadia progressed, I came to appreciate that every matter—regardless of its perceived importance—requires diligence, precision, and intellectual agility. Growth in litigation is rarely linear; it is the product of sustained effort, patience, and humility. The profession teaches you that it is better to take deliberate steps than to chase quick wins. Success lies in consistent performance, staying focused, and not being swayed by external comparisons. Ultimately, perseverance and commitment—not shortcuts—are the true markers of progress in this field.
Being dual-qualified as a Solicitor in England & Wales and an Advocate in India is a rare accomplishment. What motivated you to pursue this path, and how has it enhanced your ability to handle cross-border disputes or advise international clients?
Preparing for the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) significantly deepened my understanding of the law. The SQE not only enhances one’s grasp of Indian law but also equips practitioners with nuanced legal principles that, although rarely argued in Indian courts, are often favourably applied when effectively presented.
Following the completion of my LL.M., I was driven by a strong desire to further strengthen my legal acumen, especially in the context of local and general laws of England and Wales—such as criminal, property, and civil law—which have profoundly influenced the Indian legal system. These laws, having been extensively borrowed and embedded into our legal framework, are best understood through a comparative lens.
After conducting thorough research and engaging with qualified Solicitors, I was convinced that studying for the SQE would provide me with the foundational understanding of English law necessary to gain a richer, more structured comprehension of Indian law. While an LL.M. offers a broad, often international, legal perspective, the SQE is grounded in the practical and substantive law of England and Wales, which a Solicitor is expected to advise on across a wide range of practice areas. This distinction made the SQE particularly appealing as a rigorous yet rewarding route to legal excellence.
My SQE preparation has already had a tangible impact on my practice. At Economic Laws Practice, where I was involved in a variety of criminal and property cases, my enhanced understanding of legal principles has proven invaluable. Moreover, the knowledge gained has played a significant role in navigating a complex arbitration involving mortgage disputes, stamp duty issues, and interest-related legal principles.
You’ve advised clients across a wide spectrum, from defamation and regulatory enforcement to complex partnership disputes. Can you share an example of a particularly challenging or meaningful case and how you navigated it?
One matter I fondly recall – which was handled by me entirely independently – involves an engaging dispute in the realm of Intellectual Property Law, where I had the opportunity to defend a business conglomerate which was sued for alleged trademark infringement relating to the name of a restaurant it had established in India. The opposing party, a restaurant chain based in the United States, had engaged one of India’s leading IP law firms to represent them.
The crux of the dispute revolved around the use of the restaurant’s name. The opposing party not only sought its immediate discontinuation but also demanded an exorbitant amount in damages and compensation. However, once I presented our defense, it became evident that their claims were unfounded. My argument drew upon a range of statutory and common law principles, including the absence of cross-border reputation, lack of trademark advertisement or market penetration in India, the generic and descriptive nature of the name, and the failure to establish continuous use. These factors collectively undermined the credibility of their claims and formed a strong foundation for our defense.
Rather than escalating the matter further, the opposing party recognized the weakness of their position and initiated settlement discussions. What followed were protracted negotiations under the aegis of the Delhi High Court. In a rather unexpected outcome, the settlement concluded with my client receiving compensation—rather than paying it. In exchange, my client agreed to slightly modify the restaurant’s name, though the establishment eventually closed due to limited footfall.
As someone qualified in two legal systems, what are the biggest differences you’ve observed in dispute resolution culture between India and the UK?
While the Indian and UK legal systems share a common foundation rooted in common law principles, the administration of justice in the two countries differs significantly. In my experience, litigation in the UK is far more streamlined and structured to promote early resolution. Protracted legal battles, which are relatively common in India, are a rarity in the UK.
UK courts often actively encourage—and in some instances, require—parties to explore settlement options before proceeding to trial. This emphasis on alternative dispute resolution and various pre-action protocols helps to reduce the burden on the judiciary and results in more efficient case management. Even though pre-litigation mediation in India is mandatory for commercial matters, it is not strictly followed before proceeding for litigation on one ground or the other.
To put this into perspective, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom hears and decides approximately 80 to 120 cases per year. In contrast, the Supreme Court of India handles nearly 600 matters in a single day. Similarly, the lower courts in the UK typically list only two to three cases for hearing each day, allowing for focused and in-depth deliberation. In India, however, the dockets of lower courts are often overcrowded, with judges expected to handle a substantially higher volume of cases daily.
What guidance would you offer to young lawyers interested in building a career in dispute resolution and arbitration, particularly those exploring international qualifications or LL.M. programs abroad? What key skills or experiences should they prioritize?
This question has vexed many students in the past and therefore I will strive to answer this in a clear and concise manner. I firmly believe that pursuing an LL.M. can provide invaluable exposure, especially in fields with an international focus. However, it’s essential to approach this decision with clear and realistic expectations. An LL.M. should not be pursued solely as a pathway to employment abroad, as many students may face a harsh reality—the job market in foreign jurisdictions is often limited and highly competitive. The decision to pursue an LL.M. should be guided by a range of considerations—academic interests, professional goals, financial feasibility, and personal fulfilment. There’s no universal path, and what works for one may not suit another. Therefore, it’s important to evaluate all these factors carefully before taking the plunge.
An LL.M. can be especially beneficial in fields with a strong international focus such as international arbitration, cross-border commercial litigation, international trade law, transnational mergers and acquisitions, and similar areas. In such domains, the specialized knowledge and global perspective offered by an LL.M. can significantly enhance your career prospects.
In my experience, gaining some work experience before pursuing an LL.M. is highly advisable. There are two key reasons for this: first, with practical experience, you’re better positioned to understand and appreciate the academic content of the program. Second, if you intend to leverage your LL.M. for international job opportunities, prior work experience may place you in a stronger position. That said, I’m not suggesting waiting too long—after all, the energy, enthusiasm, and flexibility you have at 26 may not quite be the same at 36.
An LL.M. also offers an excellent platform for building a global professional network. It brings together individuals from diverse jurisdictions, offering the chance to forge meaningful connections and broaden your international legal perspective—both of which are valuable assets in today’s interconnected legal landscape.
While the LL.M. certainly plays a pivotal role in supplementing legal knowledge and providing a strong academic foundation, it is not a substitute for the essential traits of a successful lawyer—hard work, resilience, and sharp analytical skills. Rather, it serves as a powerful catalyst that enhances these qualities and prepares one for the evolving demands of modern legal practice.
Get in touch with Abhirath Thakur –
