Competition in law while tough is just as much if not more in MBA. In MBA people from all backgrounds are competing, courses demand ease with maths, economics and many other which as lawyer you would have encountered in recent times.

Assuming your 70% is in CBSE that does not reflect well for you. Being lawyers you will get leg up especially for certain IIMs where diversity of student is valued. Getting very high CAT percentile can guarantee a place at IIM A though, but again getting that rank will be incredibly tough.

Traditional go to sectors for MBA granduates like Consulting, IB have been changing. Consulting is not doing good, MBB are not in rosy period. Market is much worse compared to 2021 when strong demand was anticipated. IB salaries no longer give same premium they gave earlier.

One good thing is that post MBA you have many more high paying role within companies. If you are from good college you will get good salary with good work life balance. Work can also be good depending on the sector.

Any corrections are welcomed.

Hello everyone,

I’m a 26-year-old advocate with six months of experience in criminal and civil litigation. Here’s a bit about my background:

Academics: Scored 9 CGPA in 10th, 70% in 12th, and 60% in LLB from Delhi University. Since DU’s grading doesn’t go much higher than 68-69%, I’m a bit stuck at this percentage.

Experience: Mostly criminal litigation with senior advocates, but I haven’t gained any corporate law experience so far.

Possible Certifications: Open to adding a CFA or other relevant credentials if it’d make me more competitive in finance or consulting.

Why I’m Considering an MBA

1. Better Earning Potential: The financial outlook with an MBA is appealing.

2. Tough Competition in Law: Being a DU grad rather than from a top NLU, it feels like a steep climb to get into T1 firms, especially with the intense competition.

3. First-Gen Lawyer: As a first-generation lawyer, I sometimes feel isolated without the family connections and backing that others from my college seem to have.

Seeking Advice

1. Leveraging My Law Degree: Is there a way to make my LLB from DU work better for me? Could tax law or another specialized legal area provide more growth?

2. Alternative Certifications: Would adding a CFA or similar help bridge the gap if I do decide to transition to consulting/finance?

3. MBA Feasibility: From a legal perspective, is the shift to an MBA sensible? Would an MBA help open doors that my law degree alone might not?

I’d appreciate any advice on how to maximize the value of my law degree in today’s market, or if pursuing an MBA is a more strategic move. Thanks in advance!

Yes, recently an equity partner at the Noida office of KCO bought a villa at Panchsheel Park, New Delhi which was around 28-30 crores. I went to his residence for some meeting and the villa is luxurious. Other than that, many T1 partner in Delhi buy apartments in posh societies. Though most prefer to buy a penthouse once they start earning 1 crores PA.

Don't agree with this analysis when it comes to law firms! Just look around and see how many law firms are not in the fancy area/popular area.. Irrespective of the cost and hassles associated with popular localities in big cities, law firms will be concentrated in certain areas.

For example, I have not seen big/upcoming law firms having their offices in West Delhi, East Delhi or North Delhi. Most are concentrated either in Central Delhi or South Delhi.

In case of Mumbai, you will see law firms in South Bombay and few in BKC. Apart from ICUL, not sure if any famous/prominent firm has office which are north of BKC.

All this is because law firms are heavy brand dependent and that gets diluted if you are not is fancy locality. No one cares how the team commutes and issues faced by them.

To answer the main thread, I think the overpopulation is definitely causing major issues and gravity of such issues are increasing with time. Delhi still has good public transport due to Metro (but last mile connectivity is not that great). Mumbai has been in construction forever (like Delhi has about 25 years back around Commonwealth games). Overall city infrastructure, does not justify rent of residential properties. Add to that pollution (which now is also increasing in Tier 2, 3, 4 cities) is just killing people.

Government does not appear to have done enough. In case of Delhi, centre and state blame each other or neighboring states, but cities like Mumbai (which has a rich municipality, state coffers, complete power) are also not looking to improve the quality of air and quality of life.

wont get worse imo, India realises this and is expanding. Firms are opening shops in smaller cities even though as of now those offices are dirt small but Mumbai and Delhi are both expanding further wide into NCR and Navi Mumbai and Third Mumbai which will both get bigger with an airport and the proposed tax breaks to the region from the state government which might move jobs there to help along with building up and increasing FSI and also infra projects to reduce overcrowding.

It is bad rn but steps are being taken to cure it for the first time ever so lets hope

What is the purpose of this charade of oh we care about student learning when the marking is random anyway. Most people just mark their pet students well, while others are given average marks regardless of one putting in the requisite effort. Might as well save us from these optics of 'caring' about student learning and being fair when they clearly aren't.

Assistant Professor entry level: Around 12 lpa.

Assistant Professor Senior Scale (that's what you can probably get if the five years of experience of yours has been as a full time AP at any university) entry level: Around 16 lpa

Assistant Professor Selection Grade entry level: Around 20 lpa

Associate Professor entry level: Around 25 lpa

Professor entry level: Around 30 lpa

I have lectures for only 2 hours in my final semester after which I got nothing much to do. My team suggested that I join back whenever I am done with my break. I have a good set of co-interns in the office, decent working hours and I like my daily dose of interaction. It is fun to work on a practice area you like with a job in hand and no monthly billing targets hanging over your head. I feel this way, I’ll keep myself occupied in a positive way.

My family is financially well off but it is awkward for me to bug them for money especially for my outings, movies, dinners, shopping etc. Yeah, so i am fairly motivated for the 20k stipend. I use it to buy whatever that makes me happy :)

I'm a 26-year-old first-generation woman lawyer from a Tier-3 National Law University, with almost a year of experience as an in-house counsel at a company in Mumbai. My family is based in a Tier-2 city with a High Court. They have been encouraging me to switch to litigation. They feel that litigation would provide a more socially engaging role, and since financial stability isn't a concern, they think it's an ideal move. They are ready to support me fully until I establish myself.

I would appreciate insights from other first-generation advocates to help me consider this shift. Specifically:

1. How long should I work under a senior advocate before starting independently?
2. What strategies would be most effective to gain traction as an independent practitioner, especially as a newcomer to litigation?
3. Would you recommend switching from in-house counsel to litigation, and why?

I’d be grateful for any advice. Thanks!

No they won’t. They don’t care about womens sports. Everyone knew this when the IBA released its correspondence and reports in august and idiots dismissed it as “Russian disinformation” - as if Russia would have any reason to care about the womens welterweight Olympic medal. And now it’s French authorities and no one will still care.

He has balls and a micro penis but people will still screech about “misgendering” and “oh this is just right wing propaganda “ rather than admit that their own misogyny.

I am honestly glad that Chandu made it a point to criticise him the way he did. Because if not, liberals like me would have always belived that maybe circumstances didn't allow him to do things the right way. But no. Chandu never did them because he never wanted to, not because he couldn't.

oh, to be trolled by your own counterparts

https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/justices-nagarathna-dhulia-object-to-cji-chandrachuds-remarks-against-justice-krishna-iyer-274280

to oppose his economic theory is one thing, but to call his intent into question is a whole different problem.