I have read the article by Gautam Mohanty and Gaurav Rai. I think the article skillfully highlights the difference between loss of profit and loss of profitability in the computation of damages. A reviewer is not supposed to check each and every citation. As long as the arguments are valid, there is logical flow, and there is a scholarly contribution, the article is fit for publication.

Speaking from experience, if the editors and reviewers do use AI to supplement their own efforts, then these type of matters can be easily flagged. Otherwise, very few peer reviewers will take the trouble of checking every footnote. After all, they don't get paid for their work.

I have had the misfortune of reading 2 recent pieces published by NLSBLR and NLSIR, which have been cited hereunder. Neither had been actually peer-reviewed. The NLSBLR one was filled with assertions with absolutely unrelated citations. The NLSIR one quoted an entire paragraph of a judgment. When cross-checked against the given citation, it turned out not to appear in the actual text. Pathetic peer-review mechanisms. These two articles also show that the quality, too, has greatly decreased with the onslaught of AI assistance in legal scholarship.

NLSBLR Article: Footnote Nos. 5,9,10,17, etc. in Deepanshu (2025) “The Pitfalls of Dual Regulatory Oversight in CIRP- IBC, 2016 Vs. Competition Act, 2002”, National Law School Business Law Review- Vol. 11- Iss. 2, Article 3. Available at- https://repository.nls.ac.in/nlsblr/vol11/iss2/3/

NLSIR Article: Footnote No. 54 on page 15, where the last paragraph cites National Highways Authority of India v Hindustan Construction Co Ltd, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 120, The excerpt purportedly quoted from the judgment does not appear in its actual text. Article: Mohanty, Gautam Mr and Rai, Gaurav (2025) "Delays, Disruptions, and Diminished Margins: Reassessing Loss Claims in Indian Construction Law," National Law School of India Review: Vol. 36: Iss. 1, Article 1. DOI: 10.55496/GWKE5324 Available at: https://repository.nls.ac.in/nlsir/vol36/iss1/1

NLS 3 year LLBs are getting placed and also there is no end date to starting a legal career. But if you want to join corporate law you need to upfront be at peace with your immediate seniors being younger than you. There are a fair number of examples of people who have successfully switched to corporate law at a later stage in my life but I have also seen a few people struggle with taking instructions and criticisms from people much younger than then and then quitting. As long as you can manage that you will do fine.

Mishra has Sudhir by the balls. Sudhir sucked up to the BCI to make the dodgy (but successful) argument in the Karnataka HC that only NLSIU is a national law university because it was set up by the BCI and the CJI is Chancellor. With the BCI's blessings, Sudhir has expanded NLSIU and changed the character of the institution.

How did this happen?!! More than 700 alumni protested against CJI and the BCI Chief Misra attending the NLS convocation and it got cancelled. Then the Governing Council and alumni association sat together. Now it appears that the Governing Council with Misras men on it have decided on the convo with both Misra and CJI. I cant wait to see the empty seats.

https://www.barandbench.com/amp/story/news/cji-surya-kant-to-attend-nlsiu-convocation-on-october-17

Work is professional not personal. As foe the environment. Its CAM. Toxicity is there from the top to bottom. Besides, we have had enough of this thread and this set. Going on endlessly. This was a siloed team which never worked with anyone outside and never knew the importance of collaboration. Good riddance where they left and good luck where they go.

Moving on....

To be honest, that comment reeks of favouritism. Every team has strong performers, but repeatedly holding up a select few as proof that everything is working ignores the experiences of everyone else.

If the response to persistent attrition is "they couldn't meet expectations", that does not signal a team looking for a reset. It signals a team that has learned nothing from the departures and sees no reason to change.

'Law is demanding' is probably the most overused justification in the profession. People are not leaving because they suddenly discovered that legal practice involves hard work. They knew that when they joined. The more relevant question is why so many people who are willing to tolerate the same demanding work conditions elsewhere, but not in this particular team.

As for the '2 star SAs', every team has strong performers. That does not address concerns about culture, leadership or attrition. Pointing to a couple of successful individuals does not explain away the experiences of everyone else.

And 'everyone needs to live up to expectations' is fair enough, provided those expectations apply equally to partners and leadership. If associates are being judged on performance, then leadership should also be judged on retention, team morale, mentorship and the ability to build a sustainable practice.

At some point, recurring attrition stops being an individual performance issue and starts looking like a management issue. The numbers over the last few years make that a perfectly legitimate question to ask.

Hello, I requested him for a telephonic discussion to understand what kind of services he is offering before subscribing to his plan. But, he replied (which appeared to be automated or may be AI driven) stating even to discuss with him, I need to pay for the plan first. Then I didn't find him convincing enough to take it forward.

Hell no, it's all just fluff. I saw a post on LinkedIn saying that got services from him, and it had a lot of spelling mistakes ( even made spelling mistakes on the person's name). I also contacted him about a year ago, and he said he would give a free checklist for a resume. Once i did message him i got an automatic message stating Please give me your resume. I stupidly gave it, and then he quoted, " I’ve gone through it and here’s the honest truth (most students never hear this) Your CV isn’t weak because of your skills. It’s weak because it hides them." He then started quoting prices to help fix the resume

The comparison itself is flawed, ▮▮▮. How do you compare AMS/Sibal and Salve/Mehta with her? ▮▮▮. I don't have any personal grudges for her or doubt her credentials based on her grad school, but that's how it looks. She joined the bandwagon at the right time and has made herself a somewhat recognisable face, which might help launch her own legal career, but that's all.

As far as Oxbridge or Ivy grads go, I am sure none of them is interested enough or has time at hand to join this pressure group, since CJP is focused only on an agitation-based dialogue and is a rather new outfit with no credible history. Well-read and informed individuals are likely to throw weight behind either Congress or BJP or stay completely out of it. Plus, a profession built on seniority and reputation, which takes years, if not decades, no one in their right mind will likely take a completely supportive stand on it, except some who are willing to splash their faces across new channels and revel in their short-lived fame.

Hi everyone. I have read that Indian law firm partners who move abroad to foreign law firms get designated as Senior Associate there first. And after few years of work when they are made partners there they generally get India practice/ India facing work. How much of this is true, and how much do they get paid at these India Practice teams? Is it equal to their normal teams?

What's with nlud faculty feeling proud is giving less marks ? That omg 15 out of 25 is my average and it is very high! Are other nlus also facing the same? They even harras the faculty who gives more marks because what if our answers are actually worth good marks and we like their classes and do even better?

Luthra and Luthra Law Offices India is done. HC has no idea what to do. Seems disinterested in running the firm. Have heard rumblings he and his minions only likes doing cash deals. Not even bill it to the firm anymore. The equity partners do not see eye to eye anymore. Almost everyone nice who joined is out of the door or has put in their papers. This is the tragic death of the legacy of the legendary RKL. Blame HC.

Hi everyone. I am a 2nd-year student who is interested in competition law as a practice area. I am currently looking for any internship opportunities, whether with firms or independent practitioners, who would be open to taking on an incoming third-year student in May/June 2027. So far, I haven't been able to find anyone other than tier 1 firms, which seem far-fetched at this point in time.

Any leads wrt the aforementioned helps a lot. Thank you.

All the information you have given here - it has been so easy to trace it back to you, specially if you have been extremely entitled to the seniors at SAM. Further, do not worry, we will make sure that you do not have to do an assessment with SAM. Good luck grinding that entitlement in the chambers of a senior.

▮▮▮ Deloitte ▮▮▮ M&A Tax Associate role. I’m a fresher with experience in PE/VC and M&A transactions, along with exposure to Banking & Finance, project finance and capital markets, but I have limited knowledge of tax.

Could anyone familiar with Deloitte’s M&A Tax practice advise me on what I should prepare, the technical areas I should focus on, and what I can expect in the interview? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. Please🙏

Curious how many practising advocates here are actually using AI regularly, beyond the occasional ChatGPT query.

I've been building LawgicHub AI for the last two years, and we've spent a lot of that time working with Indian lawyers trying to understand what actually makes these tools useful in practice.

We've built legal research, drafting, document review, citation verification and case tracking into one workspace, with a free tier so advocates can properly try it without committing to another subscription.

But I'm curious about the broader experience here. Research seems like the obvious use case, except you still have to verify the authorities. Drafting saves time, but everyone has their own formats. And I'm not convinced lawyers necessarily want another platform to manage their matters.

For those who've tried Draft Bot Pro, Jhana, ChatGPT, LawgicHub or anything else, what are you actually using regularly?

And what's stopping you from using these tools more? Accuracy, quality of output, pricing, or just that they don't fit into how you already work?

I'd genuinely appreciate hearing from practising advocates, including anyone who's tried LawgicHub and found it lacking. I'm happy to answer questions about the product too.

I'm one of the founders of LawgicHub, so obviously not an unbiased commenter here.

We've been working on similar problems for Indian lawyers, particularly legal research, drafting and citation verification. One thing we've found is that getting a convincing-looking AI answer is relatively easy. Making sure the authorities actually exist and support the proposition is much harder.

We've tried to build around that, while keeping the product affordable for individual advocates. There's a free tier if anyone wants to compare the workflows themselves.

I'd genuinely be interested in hearing what people here find useful or unreliable in these tools, particularly for litigation work.

https://lawgichub.com

Ambani?

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/elon-musk-blames-starlink-roadblocks-in-india-on-monopolistic-chokeholds-101791392998055.html

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2107854307077034294

I am a fresh law graduate and have been working for the past 6–7 months at a small law firm, and honestly, I am so done.

The compensation is poor compared to the amount of work people put in here. The firm itself advertises X as the industry standard in the market but actually pays Y, which is significantly lower. On top of that, reimbursements don't come on time, and even salaries get delayed. I am trying to switch, but I haven't been able to do so.

While the seniors are supportive from a work perspective, some of them are just way too enthusiastic about work, to the point where they taunt you almost every single day over unnecessary things. For example, if you stay in the office longer than they do, they take pride in it, almost as if to say, "Look at me, you are trying to be like me." I don't even know how to explain this, but these things happen regularly.

I don't know if all this is normal in the legal profession. Maybe some of it is, but there are so many small things that, if I tried to write them all down, this post would become way too long.

I AM ALSO TRYING TO SWITCH, BUT THERE HAS BEEN NO LUCK. I don't know what to do anymore. It seems like no better-tier firm is hiring right now, or at least I haven't been able to find an opportunity. I have been trying.

I feel depressed about my situation. And it is not about me believing that I am not built for this profession or this environment. I don't know what happened over the past year. I eventually landed this job, perhaps because the market wasn't in my favour, or perhaps because I lacked something. I genuinely don't know. But this firm is just way too frustrating to work at.

Most of them try to become bua every day and do the most unnecessary things. For example, there are limited subscriptions and user slots for certain tools, and instead of sharing access, they change the passwords for themselves and say they won't share them. I know these things might sound stupid or insignificant, but they add to the frustration when they happen regularly.

These little things, which might seem insignificant individually, are affecting everything.

I don't go to this place with even the slightest smile anymore. I know not everyone goes to the office smiling, but I have reached a point where I don't even feel like interacting with my team. The thing is, they seem to feel the same way about how things are here, whether it is compensation, exposure, or the way the administration handles things.

At least one thing should be stable when you are not paying people well: the salary should come on time. I am willing to work hard and put my ass on the line for work. I don't mind working long hours or putting in the effort. But the basic administrative issues, delayed payments, and all these stupid little things are killing my will to work.

I don't have any savings. I thought I would start saving early in my career, but the money isn't even enough to put anything aside. I feel stuck.

What makes it worse is that I have seen the trend at this firm. People seem to remain stuck here for at least three years before they manage to switch. Some have taken five years. I don't know whether it is because other firms don't rate this firm highly or because of some other reason, but the trend is worrying. Moving to a bigger firm seems to take a lot of time.

I am trying to find a way out, but I don't know how long this is going to take, and I don't know how long I can keep going like this.

I am not directly asking for a job. I genuinely want advice.

For those who have been in a similar situation early in their careers, what did you do? Do things eventually get better? Should I just keep working here while continuing to look for opportunities, even if it takes another year or two? How do you deal with a situation where you want to leave, are actively trying to leave, but just cannot seem to find a way out?

I am willing to work hard and learn. I just don't want these things to kill my motivation so early in my career.

Please help. Any genuine advice would be really appreciated.