Live Blogging

DAY 2 

The flagship event of our college, the journey which we embarked upon, comes to an end. The third National Moot Court Competition is officially closed. 

Throughout this journey, we got a lot to take back, a lot to remember and a lot to be proud of. It was indeed a bumpy ride but in the end, the hard work did pay off. 

Kudos to all the participants. Kudos to all the volunteers who have worked day and night for this event. Kudos to the MCA who made sure that this event functions smoothly. And finally, Kudos to Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad. 

This is the blogging team, signing off! Until next time.

Team Members– Ananya Rajaram, Vidhan Dubey, Ashwin Nambiar, Faaiz Irfan, Parth Saluja, Kevin Jayaraj, Tarun Srigiriraju, Siddartha Mitra, Pratyusha Ganesh, Sulagna Dutta, Monalisa, Dipshika and Priyanka Talwar.




Reads suggested by the guest of honor and the hon’ble chief guest:


  • Partition of India – Legend and Reality by Seervai.
  • Kashmir beyond terrorism by Salman Kushe.
  • 7 Habits of the most successful people by Stephen.
  • You can win by Shiv Khera.


Inspirational Quotes used by the Chief Guest and Guest of Honor to motivate students:


  • Unless you sharpen your mind, your mind will become rusty.
  • Genius is admired, wealthy is envied, power is feared and character is trusted.
  • Worry ends where faith begins.
  • Your attitude decides your altitude.
  • Endure difficult times- Life is not a bed of roses.
  • A quitter will never win and a winner will never quit



Winner- Sastra University

Best memo- Symbiosis Law School Noida

1 Runner up- UPES Dehradun

2nd runner up- Symbiosis Law School Noida

Best speaker- Rishab Suppal SLS Noida


                       Varsha Singh Christ University


6:00 pm- Ms. Ambrina Khan delivers the vote of thanks and congratulates all the teams for their enthusiastic participation.




5:45 pm- Prize distribution begins. And the results are out!!!


5:40 pm- The Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian takes valuable time out, to elucidate on the Moot problem and in due course gives valuable advice on how to tackle future moot problems.


5:37 pm- “The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence” – Dalai Lama as quoted by Justice V. Ramasubramanian.


5:33 pm- The Justice appreciates and applauds the Legal Drama, “The Good, The Bad and…. The Divine?” and advises the students to read the book titled, “The Hindu view of Life” by Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan.


5:28 pm- The importance of wit is clearly demonstrated by Justice V. Ramasubramanian as he continues to enlighten the audience with rib tickling anecdotes.

Pic – Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian



5:23 pm- “What is success in life today, need not be success tomorrow.” – Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian.


5:20 pm- The Chief Guest, the Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian, starts his speech by making witty comments and brings the atmosphere to a cheery mood.


5:18 pm- Mr. Bulusu concludes his address by wishing all the budding lawyers, Good Luck.


5:14 pm- Mr. Bulusu takes the example of Mahatma Gandhi, and talks of Gandhi’s evolution in oration from being a lawyer in South Africa to becoming the Father of the Nation and leading the Independence movement.


5:07 pm- Mr. Bulusu advises the students on learning the art of using legal language appropriately, he says this can only be achieved by making a habit of reading judgments.


5:04 pm- Mr. Sampath Bulusu quotes Justice ‘Abbot Parry’’s “Seven Lamps of Advocacy” – (i) Honesty (ii) Courage (iii) Industry (iv) Wit (v) Eloquence, (vi) Judgment and (vii) Fellowship.


5:00 pm- “When you lose, you don’t lose anything, in fact you gain in experience.” – Mr.Sampath Bulusu


4:58 pm- The audience listen as Mr.Bulusu recollects his days at his Alma mater.


4:56 pm- The Guest of Honour, Mr. Sampath Bulusu, takes the podium.


4:54 pm- The Guest of Honour, Mr. Supratim Chakraborty, is invited to deliver a speech.


4:50 pm- The Officiating Director delivers a speech and welcomes the Guests.


4:49 pm- The Chief Guest and the Guests of Honour are being felicitated by the Officiating Director.


The Valedictory Begins!


The Drama comes to an end with uncontrolled applause.


4:30 pm- The drama brings in a new definition to secularism.


4:28 pm- Scene 4 takes a serious turn with the protagonist impressing the audience with his monologue


4:24 pm- The lawyers arguments at the end of the third scene, made the crowd hungry for more.


4:15 pm- The attention to detail in scene three is impressive which was loved by both the faculty and the audience alike.


4:05 pm- Scene two’s colour scheme did the trick, which really got the crowd going.

3:59 pm- Scene 1 continues with the arrival of Narayan, the great messenger.


3:53 pm- The first scene’s starts on a high with the audience enjoying every minute of it.


3:50 pm- The play starts off with an encouraging applause from the crowd.


DISCLAIMER: All characters portrayed in the play are purely fictional. Any resemblance to any character whether living, dead, or mythological is purely co-incidental.


Alfred Hitchcock once said “What is drama but life with the dull bits cut out.”

The Mad Hatters (drama troupe) in this year’s National Moot Court Competition valedictory ceremony is set to present their awe inspiring performance in the satire, The Good, The Bad and …..The Divine?

Make yourselves comfortable because you’re in for a heavenly ride!!!



As the participants stand and gaze at the beautiful trophy, they wait in anticipation for the results. What will the verdict be? Stay tuned to find out. 





3:07 pm- The Judge lightens up the mood in the auditorium by making a light-hearten joke


3:05 pm- The rebuttals by the counsel for the respondents is in full swing.


3:02 pm- The Counsel for the Petitioners have ended their rebuttal round.


2:59 pm- The Judges request the parties to keep their rebuttals specific and concise, and not to hammer on the same point twice.


2:57 pm- The co-counsel of the respondents moves onto the Prayer. The Rebuttal Round begins!!!


2:54 pm- The co-counsel moves onto the fourth issue.


2:50 pm- The Judges warn the co-counsel of the respondents as she walks into murkier territory.


2:46 pm- The counsel from the respondent’s side flips through the pages as she tries to answer the questions raised by the Hon’ble Bench.


2:44 pm- The researcher for the respondent looks flustered, trying to support the co-counsel’s arguments constantly.


2:43 pm- The arguments of the co-counsel seem to be going in a somewhat flawless manner until now as the Judges nod in agreement.


2:42 pm- The co-counsel approaches the dais and addresses the third issue.


2:40 pm-  The Honourable Judges ask the respondents’ counsel to sum up her arguments as she falls short of time.


2:38 pm- The judges feel that the counsel on behalf of the respondent is beating around the bush and ask her to address the point of controversy.


2:36 pm- The first year students are engrossed as they witness the final proceedings of this flagship event.


Pic-  The Lordships 


2:25 pm- The MCA members are on high alert as they pay heed to not only the hearing which is going on but also to the smooth functioning of the event.


2:21 pm- The counsel representing the respondent, clarifies the doubts of the Hon’ble Bench by citing Puttuswamy’s case.


2:17 pm-  The counsel for the respondents begins her arguments by addressing the first issue.


2:16 pm- The co-counsel moves on to the prayer and rests her case.


2:14 pm- The co-counsel seeks an extension of two minutes. It is granted!


2:11 pm- The co-counsel rushes through her arguments, as only two minutes are remaining on the clock.

Pic- And it goes down!!!!


2:07 pm- The judges draw the second counsel’s attention to one of the sections that the petitioners have used in the case, by reading it out loud, which clearly shows their dissatisfaction towards the usage of the section in the present scenario.


2:00 pm- The judge is asking the relevancy of the co-counsel’s assertions.


1:56 pm- The second counsel from the petitioner’s side contends that the data protection laws in the country are insufficient.


1:53 pm- The second counsel from the petitioners seeks permission to approach the dais.

Pic- The first counsel for the Petitioners


1:51 pm- The Judge asks the first counsel for the petitioner to wrap up as soon as possible as she has run out of time.


1:49 pm- The judge is not satisfied with the answer. The Hon’ble judge does not feel that the counsel has answered his question.

1:46 pm- The Hon’ble Judges ask the counsel to read a specific clause from a statute and raise concerns over their conformity to it.


1:45 pm- The Counsel refers to the contract entered into by the parties to strengthen her argument. The Judges disagree and cite a law but the counsel claims the law itself to be unconstitutional.


1:44 pm- The judges allow the counsel to proceed to the next issue and she starts advancing the arguments. 


1:43 pm- The judges raised an interesting point regarding the procedures laid down in the Criminal Procedural Code.


1:41 pm- The judges just raised a concern over the last point by referring to a case law.


1:40 pm- The counsel for the petitioner is answering the judges’ questions satisfactorily, but the judges don’t seem to be convinced.


1:37 pm- The Judges seek clarification as they are not convinced and ask the counsel to elaborate more on the point of controversy.


1:34 pm- The Hon’ble Judge has just put forth a question regarding certain discrepancies in the memorial.


1:32 pm- The counsel for the petitioner moves onto to her issues with ease and makes sure that her arguments are delivered smoothly.


1:31 pm- The counsel seems to be well versed with the facts as she starts speaking.


1:30 pm- The counsel from the petitioner’s side seeks permission to approach the dais and starts her submissions.

1:29 pm- The Court room masters reads out the rules to be followed during the proceedings for one last time!


1:28 pm- The Judges have arrived in the grand auditorium of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad and they are being seated.


1:25 pm- The time has come! The stage is set for the final showdown and the competitors are ready to look the enemy in the eyes with lock, stock and two smoking barrels. Suit up! because this is going to be LEGEN..wait for it…DARY!!! 


The Semi-finals come to an end as two teams out of the thirty that came, qualify for the finals. The finals are scheduled in the colossal auditorium and will begin after lunch.


11:45 am– The intense and enjoyable argumentative semifinal round with both the parties presenting their rebuttals comes to an end in the Assembly Hall.


11:40 am- With the rebuttals getting over, the Semi Final round comes to an end in the Moot Court Hall!


11:35 am- Moot Court Hall- The petitioners have taken the respondents by surprise as they point out a major flaw in their arguments.


Pic- Tension builds as the rebuttals begin in both the court rooms.


11:24 am- Moot Court Hall- The counsel for the respondents is easily handling the questions raised by the bench. The Judges seem to be quite impressed by her answers.


11:20 am- Assembly Hall- The counsel finally gets to proceed and now addresses the third issue. Meanwhile, the petitioners seem to be well prepared with their rebuttals.


11:12 am- Assembly Hall- The remaining arguments are taken up and continued confidently by the co-counsel for the respondents.


11:10 am- Assembly Hall- The arguments seem to have become interesting enough to continue for half an hour straight. The teams in the semi-final round seem to be quite skilled indeed.


11:06 am- Moot Court Hall- The second counsel from the respondents’ side approaches the podium and advances the arguments for the remaining issues.


11:02 am- Assembly Hall- Time’s up! The counsel for the respondents looks at the bench and asks for time extension which is granted to him. However, he still doesn’t seem to clarify the questions raised by the bench.


10:59 am- Moot Court Hall- The judges lighten the mood by sharing a moment of laughter with the participants.


10:55 am- Moot Court Hall- The counsel for the respondents delivers the arguments in a smooth and composed manner.


10:54 am- Assembly Hall- The Counsel for the respondents continues his arguments smoothly. He is being questioned frequently but he easily answers them. Good research and coordination help him through it.


The Shawarma Corner seems to be getting good reviews, the President of the Student Council of the college personally recommends this food stall.


10:44 am- Assembly Hall- The 1st speaker for the respondents approach the podium as the petitioners await in bated breath for the rebuttal round to annihilate the respondents’ case.


10:42 am- Moot Court Hall- The Judges have engrossed themselves in looking through the nitty gritties of the respondent’s submission before they proceed to the oral arguments.


10:40 am- Moot Court Hall- The counsel for the respondent approaches the podium and starts with her oral submissions with the Judges carefully listening to the same.


10:38 am- Assembly Hall- The counsel from the respondents’ side approaches the dais now.


10:35 am- Moot Court Hall- The counsel from the petitioners’ side tries to argue with plain logic, to which the judges respond by asking him to stick to the legal submissions.


10:32 am- Moot Court Hall- The counsel for the petitioner loses his confidence, making it harder for him to deliver his arguments.


10:30 am- Assembly Hall- There seems to be a volley of questions asked by the judges to the counsel for the petitioners. The judges don’t seem to be giving any room to breathe, yet the petitioners are bravely and calmly fighting their way out of it.


10:19 am- Assembly Hall- The counsels for the petitioner seem to be confidently deliver his arguments, and their justifications seem to be on point.


10:17 am- Moot Court Hall- The team representing the petitioners’ side seem to have a great amount of coordination. The researchers don’t have a lot to contribute in the oral submissions but this doesn’t seem to be the case here.


10:12 am- Moot Court Hall – The judges ask a series of questions to the counsel for the petitioners, making it difficult for the counsel to answer.


10:09 am- Assembly Hall – The counsel for the petitioner in course of delivering the arguments requests the judges for a time extension.


10:02 am- Assembly Hall – The counsel seems to have all the correct answers as she successfully dodges the questions fired at her by the Judges. Although, she is humble and polite in her tone, she is firm in her arguments.


10:00 am- Assembly Hall – The Judges’s questions seem to be satisfactorily answered by the counsel for the petitioner.


9:54 am- Moot Court Hall – The tone of the counsel does not seem to be appealing to the judges. However, the researcher extends a helping hand by passing a note to the speaker.


9:50 am- Moot Court Hall – The pleadings have begun with the counsel for the petitioner confidently approaching the dais, ready to deliver the arguments.


9:45 am- The judges have arrived in their respective courtrooms, and the semi-finals of this year’s NMCC has officially begun.


9:30 am- The campus has sprung into action again and it does not feel like a Sunday at all!! The Judges have been briefed and they now proceed to the Moot Court Hall for the Semi-Final round.


Pic- The stage is set!


9:15 am – Top of the morning to you! Another day and the battle continues. We are back today with more live updates. As the second and the final day begins, and four teams remain standing as they battle it out to the top. We hope they’ve got what it takes to take home the coveted trophy. So, participants and readers, buckle up as it is going to be a bumpy ride.


DAY 1 

We at Symbiosis Hyderabad, bid you adieu until it be morrow. Goodnight!!!


It has been an eventful day, here at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, and yet the excitement and enthusiasm are abundantly felt in the atmosphere. We have witnessed budding lawyers exhibit their talent. It is very promising, to say the least.


With this, we reach the end of the Quarter-finals.


8:45 pm- Room 4- The judges start scoring and the session ends.


8:38 pm- Room 4- The last courtroom left to conclude its’ session, after which the Quarterfinals round officially end.


8:29 pm- Room 4- Time is almost up, and the counsel for the respondent wraps up her arguments.


8:21 pm- Room 1- The respondents wrap up. As the Judges now score the participants, the session ends in Court Room 1.


8:14 pm- Room 4- The co-counsel for the respondent starts by clarifying some of the grey areas left by the counsel for the respondent and then moves to her part of the pleadings.


8:13 pm- Room 1- With only a couple of minutes remaining on the clock, the counsel for the respondent is far from completing her arguments.


8:09 pm- Room 3- Rebuttal round begins, with the counsel of the Petitioner pointing out the discrepancies in the arguments of the Counsel for the Respondent.


8:05 pm- Room 2- Research is everything when it comes to tackling tricky questions that participants often face in Moot Court competitions. And the Counsel of the respondent seems to understand this clearly as she answers every question and brings out her arguments, the judges take note of this.


8:00 pm- Room 4- The counsel for the respondent fails to substantiate his arguments, this disappoints the Judges.


7:58 pm- Room 2- The judges question the second counsel on behalf of the respondent, his confidence shows as he handles the questions brilliantly.


7:51 pm- Room 1- The counsel for the respondent was able to substantiate the arguments put forward, thereby satisfying the judges.


7:49 pm- Room 2- The counsels for the respondents are making formidable arguments which seem to impress the judges.


7:46 pm- Room 4- Noticing the lack of time, the judges order the plaintiffs to rush through the remainder of their arguments.


7:44 pm- Room 4- The judges seem to make it very difficult for the co-counsel on behalf of the petitioner to proceed as a barrage of questions is directed at him.


7:40 pm- Room 2- The first Counsel for the Respondents now begins his arguments.


7:35 pm- Room 3- The researcher on behalf of the petitioner is playing a major role in delivering strong arguments and answering tough questions by constantly sending chits to the counsel at the dais.


7:30 pm- Room 2- The Petitioners have exhausted their time, and the Judges are yet to be satisfied with their arguments. On request, a time extension is granted.


7:25 pm- Room 4- The Petitioner is very confident and affirming with her arguments, this seems to impress the judges.


7:20 pm- Room 1- The judge asks a tricky question which confuses the Counsel. However, she sails through it, with just a few minutes left on the clock.


7:15 pm- Room 2- The Judges start asking a series of questions to the counsel on behalf of the petitioner, who answers with unparalleled confidence.


7:07 pm- The Petitioners begin with their respective arguments in all the courtrooms.


7:05 pm- The judges have arrived and the proceedings are officially underway.


6:50 pm- The participants are seated in their respective courtrooms and are all set to battle it out in the Quarter-finals as they wait in anticipation, going over the finer points of their arguments.


6:40 pm- The judges are currently being briefed, after which the Quarter Finals will commence.


6:30 pm- The memorials have been exchanged and the draw of lots comes to an end.


6:25 pm- The results are out and the draw of lots have begun.


6:20 pm- We are back.


6:05 pm-  As we wait for the results that determine the teams that move onto the Quarter-finals, the blog team takes a short interval. We will be back with fresh updates. Stay tuned.


5:42 pm-  The verdict says that if you are going for the Mojito then do not hesitate to spend an extra Rs.10 to get Sprite instead of plain soda.

5:32 pm- Do not miss the Cinnamon Rolls and Ice Cream from the Spitfire stall for dessert. The Fires serve to be a lip-smacking appetizer.


5:24 pm-  Seems like the must at the Kolkata Quick Rolls is the Spicy Chicken Roll and the Kebab Roll. For all the Herbivores out there fret not, for we have the Baby Corn Roll.


5:07 pm- The popular recommendation for Govind’s Dosa seems to be The Pizza Dosa. You could also satisfy your taste buds with the simple Butter Masala Dosa.

4:55 pm– We have The Kingz Landing, BBQ Spitfire, Kolkata Rolls, Govind Dosa, Whatta Waffle and Shawarma Corner on campus today.


Pic – The sun is finally out! As it brightly shines over our beautiful campus, the blogging team goes out to get you a first-hand review on the range of food options we have in store for you.


4:22 pm- As the final installment of the Prelims reaches its’ culmination, the participants move towards the “Mahabhojanalay” to refuel. Stay tuned to know what’s on the menu.


Pic- The game is on.


4:07 pm- Room 1 – The last few arguments are being put forth by the defendants before the time runs out.


4:01 pm- Room 1 – While initially the Respondents seemed to be in control of the courtroom, with questions repeatedly raised by the Hon’ble Bench, it seems like the tables could turn.


3:58 pm- Room 14 – The heat turns up as the rebuttals commence, the petitioners’ 60 seconds are up.


3:52 pm- Room 1 – The Judges raise some concerns for the terminology used by the petitioners’ side. This attempt to make a point backfires at them.


3:50 pm- Room 14 – The second speaker of the respondents seems to be much more active compared to the first speaker, answering all the judges’ questions with ease.


3:45 pm- Room 14 – The counsel from the respondents’ side is not getting any time to breathe. He is being completely gutted with arguments.


Pic- Preparing for the Rebuttals.


3:30 pm- Room 6 – The first speaker on behalf of the respondent speaks uninterrupted as she denies the claim of the petitioner and justifies the stand of the respondent.


3:26 pm- Room 14 – The researcher for the petitioner seems to be the backbone of the team, working tirelessly to ensure the delivery of strong arguments and answering of tough questions.


Pic- Tension in the air?


3: 19 pm- Room 13 – The proceedings are well underway with the judges asking a series of questions, and the counsel on behalf of the petitioners responds to them while being fiercely volatile coupled unparalleled confidence which seems to have put the respondents in a nervous breakdown of thoughts. This team has the potential to make it to the finals or walk away home with the shining trophy. Clearly, they seem to be trained by the best.

3:17 pm- Room 8 – The judges grill the first speaker but she successfully dodges them. Confidence, well preparedness and a calm mind come to her rescue.


3:13 pm- Room 6 – The second speaker from the petitioners’ side continues with the arguments in an assertive tone. He faces questions thrown towards him by the bench, answering them quite patiently.


3:10 pm- Room 6 – Uninterrupted by the bench throughout his arguments, the counsel for the petitioner calls for his Co-counsel to submit his arguments dealing with the remaining issues.


Pic- And so it begins… the second installment of mooting for today.


2:58 pm- Room 5 – The judges seem to have caught on to an argument put forth by the Petitioner, and that has opened a Pandora’s box of questions.


2:53 pm- Room 6 – The counsel from the petitioners’ side seeks permission to approach the dais and is granted the same. He proceeds on a confident note with the arguments as the Judges are already familiar with the statement of facts.


2:44 pm- Round 2 of the Prelims begin as the judges arrive and the courtroom master reads out the rules of functioning of the Court Proceedings across Court Rooms.


2:40 pm- The sky seems to have cleared. A bit of sun helps in brightening up the atmosphere in the courtrooms as not much time is left before Prelims Round 2 begins.


2:30 pm- The Participants wait in anticipation for the second round of Prelims to start.


Hello everyone, the blogging team is back at it with a fresh set of updates.


As the Judges and the Participants break for lunch, we would like to take this opportunity to thank our sponsors.


1:59 pm- With this the first round of the big day comes to an end with triumphant success. As we mark the end of the Prelims Round 1, we can undoubtedly say that the participants have illustrated that when someone puts a gun to your head, you can either take the gun, call their bluff or do any of the hundred and forty-six other things.


1:30 pm- Weather Update- Mild showers are expected this afternoon. Keep your umbrellas handy.


1:17 pm- Room 1 – The first counsel from the respondents’ side approaches the dais confidently. She is well mannered and gets done with the formalities flawlessly. However, her submissions face a plethora of questions. She answers questions but seems to get a little flustered.


PicMr Supratim Chakraborty, Partner, Khaitan & Co, speaking during the Judges’ briefing.


1:00 pm- Room 12 – It seems that the counsel for the petitioner is short on time, but manages to complete the arguments.


12:58 pm- Room 8 – The second speaker asks for permission to approach the podium and is greeted by a volley of questions as soon as she starts her submissions. The Judges don’t seem to be convinced with her answers.


12:50 pm- Room 1 – The Judges seem to be very impressed with the arguments of the counsel from the petitioner’s side.


12:45 pm- Room 12 – The first counsel from the petitioner’s side has a good command over her arguments. She seems to be in control of the situation from the start. The Judges and the respondents are completely in tune with her arguments.


12:35 pm- Room 11The proceedings have commenced. The first counsel representing the Petitioners starts her oral submissions. Arguments of the petitioners seem to be structured in a persuasive manner. The judges then interject with a series of questions. The counsel tries to reply to these questions confidently. The judges seem to have caught the petitioners off guard.


12:28 pm- The Judges have arrived in their respective courtrooms and the proceedings have begun.


12:26 pm- The preliminary round for the 3rd National Moot Court Competition is about to commence with 30 Teams participating in the flagship event. Participants have taken their position in their respective courtrooms, waiting for the judges to arrive.


Pic– Briefing of Judges.


11:25 am- The judges are being briefed by the Moot Court Association of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad.


10:59 am- As the ceremony comes to an end, we see the mighty trophies shine in all their glory, and the participants wait in anticipation to take them home.


10:56 am- The Third Annual National Moot Court Competition is now officially open with the BANG of the Gavel!


10:53 am- Ms Ambrina Khan addresses the gathering and conveys her regards to the honourable chief guests for their inspirational speech.


10:49 am- The Dignitaries are being felicitated by the Officiating Director.


10:44 am- He concludes his speech with an ending quote: “Every king was once a helpless baby, every mighty ocean was once a ripple, and every great structure was once a blueprint. It is not where you are today, it is where you are going that counts”


10:39 am- The Justice reminds the participants to maintain a good character, emphasising on the need for students to be chiselled and crafted into a statue through hardworking and perseverance.


10:34 am- “A quitter will never win, a winner will never quit”- Hon’ble Justice C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy. This evokes confidence in the participants.


10: 26 am- “What makes an accomplished lawyer is the one who has three fundamental qualities—accumulation and updating of knowledge, acquiring skills of the drafting of pleadings artistically, presentation of the case; articulation, body language, voice moderation.” – Hon’ble Justice C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy.


10:23 am- The Guest of Honour wishes the participants all the best and instills a sense of confidence in them.

You can also catch a live version of the speech on TV 5 on your televisions.


10:13 am- As he speaks on the contemporary issues of our country, the audience’s interest is piqued.


10:09 am- Following the speech of the Officiating Director, the Guest of Honour Prof (Dr.) S. Surya Prakash takes the podium.


10:03 am- The Officiating Director of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, Dr Sukhvinder Singh Dari addresses the gathering.


10:00 am- Meanwhile, the ceremony awaits the arrival of the rest of the Honourable dignitaries.


9:57 am- The audience is being indulged with the trailer for the upcoming drama titled, “The Good, The Bad and…. The Divine?”


9:50 am- The Guest of honour for the day is Prof (Dr.) S. Surya Prakash (VC, MNLU, Aurangabad). We are elated to be in the esteemed presence of Hon’ble Justice C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy (HC of Judicature of Hyderabad).


9:45 am- The inaugural ceremony is all set to commence.


9:30 am- As the first ray of sun hits the Symbi empire, the judges arrive and take their seats. The day officially begins!!!


Registration Day

5:30 pm- The final lot is picked and the air streams with steely determination as the participants march out. With this, the sun sets on the Symbi battleground. See you when the sunflowers bloom. Blogging team of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad is here at a routine overhaul to keep you posted with the latest updates as the event proceeds.


5:23 pm- The memorial exchange for the preliminary round 1 has ended and round 2 has commenced.


4:50 pm – All the participants have arrived full of apprehension and are in full ardour for the draw of lots. The tension in the air builds as the officiating director of SLSH officially commences the first lot. As the organizing team delves into the final checklist, there is a mixed expression of confidence and excitement visible in the eyes of the participants.


3:00 pm – Viva la Vida world! As the Supreme Court marks the end of an era in Kerala, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad embarks upon a Journey. The Journey, that is the 3rd National Moot Court Competition. With the registrations, we mark the inception of this much-awaited affair in Symbi Hyderabad. So, march on you storm troopers, “May the force be with you”.

Conference/Seminars/LecturesLaw School News

Mooting is an engaging and challenging co-curricular activity in law school. Requiring application of legal provisions and principles to hypothetical fact situation, mooting helps inculcate research, drafting and advocacy skills. With a view to broadening the perspective of budding pleaders and researchers towards mooting at Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA, the college brings to students a series of three workshops. Moot Court Society, Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA has organsied series of workshops as follows:

1. August 04, 2018 (Title – Introduction to Mooting – Mr. Arunadhri Iyer);

2. August 11, 2018 (Research for and Drafting of Memorials – Mr. Edupunganti Shreyas); and

3. August 18, 2018 (Pleading – Ms. Jayashree Parihar).

This endeavour is to introduce students to culture and expectations of mooting.

First Workshop will be conducted by Mr. Arunadhri Iyer, Advocate, the Supreme Court of India on August 4, 2018 from 01:30 pm – 04:30 pm. It has two sessions:

Session 1 – An introduction to Mooting –Seeks to discuss about the basics, as well as finer nuances of mooting. The workshop aims at being accessible for both beginners as well as experts. While a basic understanding of what moot courts may help before you attend it, the workshop aims at discussing all the steps, skills and discipline expected of a mooting team and

Session 2 – An Introduction to Drafting and Formatting –The workshop aims at dissecting the magic sauce that goes into a well researched, well presented (and pretty looking) memorial. It will introduce the concept of a memorial, and discuss the steps to take (and avoid) in making a memorial for a moot.

About the Resource Person: Mr. Arunadhri Iyer, Advocate, Supreme Court of India

Mr. Iyer is an Advocate practicing primarily in the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court of India. Formerly Mr. Iyer has worked with Khaitan & Co, Mumbai, with Mr. Gautam Narayan, AOR, and was a Law Clerk in the Delhi High Court. He practices primarily in civil and commercial matters, as well as arbitrations.  Mr. Iyer is avid mooter and has successfully represented Symbiosis Law School, Pune in various national and international moot court competitions. He has a continuing relationship with mooting and Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA.


Workshop on Introduction to Mooting – August 04, 2018





 Introduction to Mooting

 01:30 pm – 02:30 pm


An Introduction to Drafting and Formatting

 02:45 pm – 04:30 pm






AchievementsLaw School News

The team from Symbiosis Law School, Pune has won the Asia Pacific Regional Rounds of Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot Court Competition, 2018. A total of 11 teams from India had qualified for the written memorial round to proceed to the oral rounds in Adelaide, Australia. These were: NLSIU, NLUJ, NUALS, Jindal, NLIU, SLS Pune, RMLNLU, GNLU, WBNUJS, NIRMA and CNLU.

Two Indian teams GNLU and Symbiosis Law School, Pune made it to the finals of the Oral rounds in Adelaide with Symbiosis Law School emerging as the winner of the Moot. The SLS team comprised of Shraddha Dubey, Malay Srivastava and Someny Singhal. Someny was also adjudged the 8th Best Speaker. The GNLU team bagged the runners up award. Keertana was awarded Best Speaker of the finals and prelim rounds. Sohum was awarded the 2nd Best Speaker of the prelims round. Shreya Jaipuria and Stuti Rai from NLSIU won the 4th and the 6th Best Speaker citations respectively.

The team from Symbiosis Law School, Pune will now be representing Asia Pacific Region in the World Round in October. This is the second time in a row that an Indian team has won the regional rounds as last year, the team from NLSIU had gone ahead to win the world rounds.

Law School NewsMoot Court Achievements & Reports

Justice Hidayatullah Memorial National Moot Court Competition has always witnessed spirited participation from more than 20 universities in all of its previous editions. In this edition, after scrutinising over 40 memorials in the initial memorial round, 30 teams from various reputed universities across the country have been selected to compete against each other for the coveted Justice Hidayatullah Memorial trophy, the 1st runner’s up prize, the title of the best speaker, the best memorial, and the best researcher.

Eminent academician Prof. (Dr.) M.K. Ramesh was the Chief Guest for the inaugural ceremony. Prof. Ramesh holds the professorial chair on Urban Poor and the Law, instituted by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation of Government of India. He also advised the government on climate negotiations leading to the Paris Agreement, 2015. Addressing the gathering with thought provoking words and refreshing candour, Prof. Ramesh emphasized on the role of mankind as children in the cradle of the environment rather than its masters.

The Chief Guest for the closing ceremony was Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prashant Mishra, Judge, High Court of Chhattisgarh with the Guest of Honour being Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Chandel, Judge, High Court of Chhattisgarh.

The trophy for first place in the competition was awarded to SLS, Pune, along with a cash prize of Rs. 25,000. The runner’s up trophy was awarded to NLU, Odisha, Cuttack, along with a cash prize of Rs. 15,000. Both the teams were presented with the coveted Winners and Runners up trophies respectively. The Best Memorial award was received by the team from NUSRL, Ranchi, along with a cash prize of Rs. 7,500. The Best Researcher award, based on the researcher’s test that was conducted yesterday, was awarded to Deeksha Gupta from RMLNLU, Lucknow, along with a cash prize of Rs. 7,500. The Best Speaker award, based on aggregate scores from the two preliminary rounds was awarded to Akhilesh Talluria from SLS, Pune, along with a cash prize of Rs. 7500.



Law School NewsLive Blogging


Hello and welcome to the live blog of the 5th NLUO International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2018 (IMAM). The competition begins today with the registration and inauguration followed by exchange of memos and draw of lots. 24 teams will be battling it out in preliminary rounds, followed by quarterfinals, semifinals and the much awaited finals.
Schedule for Day 1(30/03/2018) :
15:00 – 16:00 hrs – Registration
16:45 – 17:30 hrs – Inauguration Ceremony
17:30 – 18:30 hrs – Penalty Appeals
18:30 – 19:30 hrs – Draw of Lots & Exchange of Memos
20:00 – 21:00 hrs – Dinner

Stay tuned for all the live updates and highlights for the next 3 days.

16:00 hrs

The teams are here in the seminar hall and registrations have begun, the opening ceremony will be starting at 16:45 hrs.

Registration Desk
Registration Desk IMAM 2018

16:55 hrs
The opening ceremony is under way and the Faculty Adviser of The Moot Society Dr. Ananya Chakraborty starts with the welcome note to all the participants talking about the different opportunities Maritime law has to offer and the experience participants will gain from the interactions with the highly qualified panel of judges.

17:00 hrs
The Convenor of The Moot Society, Anmol Gupta, started with briefly laying out the schedule for the 3 days and also answering the queries of the teams regarding the draw of lots. She also explained the system of Penalty Appeals to the participants which further increases the transparency quotient. The Convenor ended by declaring the competition open.

17:30 hrs
Let us know about Penalty Appeals directly from our Convenor-

As a recent participant in a moot, I remember losing my mind over a two mark deduction that potentially affected my team’s best memorial citation. There are often times that moot court competitions have been also criticized for being unfair. It is only after having had such experiences and realizing that moot court competitions in India should be more transparent that we wanted to follow this practice. Penalty appeals are nothing new but we do hope that all institutions take similar initiatives so as to improve the mooting culture in India and bring more fairness and transparency in the process.”

Penalty Appeals
Penalty Appeals

18:00 hrs
Match ups are announced and Memorials are exchanged as the teams find out who they are up against for the Preliminary rounds tomorrow.

Draw of Lots
Memorial Exchange



That’s it for today, we will be live with you tomorrow morning with the first session of preliminary rounds. Till then Goodbye!


Day 2
10:15 hrs

Courtrooms are set

A very good morning to all, we are back with all the updates from the second day of NLUO IMAM 2018. The courtrooms are set, Teams all ready and the Preliminary rounds will begin at 11:00 hrs in 8 courtrooms. Following are the 23 teams battling it out in the preliminary rounds.

  1. Amity Law School, Delhi (IP University)
  2. School of Law, UPES
  3. ILS Law College, Pune
  4. Government Law College, Mumbai
  5. University school of law and legal studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University
  6. National Law University, Delhi
  7. School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore
  8. National Law Institute University Bhopal
  9. Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab
  10. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University
  11. Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar
  12. West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences
  13. National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi
  14. Pravin Gandhi College of Law
  15. National Law School of India University, Bangalore
  16.  Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur
  17. Symbiosis Law School, Pune
  18. Lloyd law college
  19. Faculty Of Law, Delhi University
  20. Maharashtra National Law University, Nagpur
  21. Madhusudan Law College, Cuttack.
  22. Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA
  23. Jindal Global Law School

11:30 hrs

The first session is underway as the teams battle it out in the first round with the humid climate of Cuttack and the barrage of questions from the judges, they surely have their work cut out.

The Applicants contend on the of jurisdiction of the Honorable Tribunal and put up a compelling case in front of the judges and finish their submissions on a high. The Respondents contend that the claimants were aware of the zero tolerance policy of plastics and waste. Both the teams end up with a satisfying look on their face.

13:00 hrs

The first session of Preliminary rounds culminate, Judges take a 10 minutes break before the second session is underway.


13:30 hrs

The second session of preliminary rounds are now in progress.

Session 2 underway

14:30 hrs
The teams now concluding their arguments for the second session of preliminary rounds.

Session 2


16:30 hrs
The teams and judges have taken their seats for the third and final session of the preliminary rounds.

Session 3 in progress


18:15 hrs
We are now done with the Preliminary Rounds and will be announcing the Top 8 in a few minutes.


19:15 hrs
The results for the Preliminary Rounds are out, Following are the top 8 teams.

  1. ILS Law College, Pune
  2. Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab
  3. National Law Institute University Bhopal
  4. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University
  5. Amity Law School, Delhi (IP University)
  6. Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar
  7. National Law School of India University, Bangalore
  8. National Law University, Delhi

19:45 hrs

The Quarter Final rounds have now started with the teams vying for a top 4 spot.

Quarter Finals

Court Room 7

20:06 hrs

The judges are extensively grilling the Claimant on jurisdictional clauses, the counsel tries to deal with the questions through case laws and contends that the claimant’s silence does not amount to acceptance. The judges proceed to the next issue where the claimant is dealing with conceptual differences between indemnity and guarantee vis a vis damages but she fails to convince the bench with her submissions.

20:22 hrs

The bench questions about the fraud with respect to the letter of indemnity which means that the claimant’s haven’t come to the court with clean hands. The bench is not convinced with the submissions and asks the claimants to not beat around the bush and concede to the wrong in good faith.


Court Room 6

20:10 hrs

The Claimant started with Citing a case from US Jurisdiction which the bench was hesitant to accept, the Counsel tried to justify his claim by stating that the international arbitration depends upon the intention of the parties.

20:17 hrs

Second speaker discusses about the 3 contaminants and tries to justify the word contaminant as opposed to substances, he also tries to justify the scope of warranty.



Court Room 5

20:18 hrs

The claimant start their submissions by pointing out to the letter which is the core of the issue, the judges ask about the letter being a letter of indemnity or letter of warranty as contended by the respondents.

20:30 hrs

The respondent started their submissions asserting that the letter is a letter of warranty. He argues that the addendum to the contract was signed without prejudice, hence cannot be used as evidence.


21:15 hrs

With this the Quarterfinals are done. The teams and the judges head for dinner. Results of the Quarterfinals to be announced post dinner.

22:00 hrs

The top 4 teams in no particular order are

  1. ILS Law College, Pune
  2. Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab
  3. National Law Institute University Bhopal
  4. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University

With this we come to the end of proceedings on day 2. See you tomorrow for the Semi Finals and Finals. Goodbye!

Day 3

10:30 hrs

Hello and welcome all to the final day of the 5th NLUO International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2018 (IMAM). We will bring to you live updates from the Semi Finals and the Finals.

Semi Final 1 (RMLNLU vs RGNUL)

Arbitration Panel (left to right) Ms. J D Rajan ,Ms. Natasha Sailopal, Mr. Sameer Shah

10:35 hrs

The Respondent start with challenging the Jurisdiction of the Tribunal and for the same justify it by stating that the disputes relate to the letter and not the charter party.

11:00 hrs

The Respondents are now being asked to take the tribunal through a timeline of the events so as to further facilitate the submissions, further the question of Contaminants is being posed by the tribunals which is dealt by the counsel by furthering the factual circumstances at the time of loading. The tribunal asks the counsel to move to his next submission.

11:10 hrs

The Counsel now moves forward to the submission regarding the charter party and how the addendum in the contract was without prejudice.

11:25 hrs

The Claimants now start with stating that the arbitration clause is broad enough to establish the claims. They claim further that their was no indication if they were previous remnants of the cargo. The tribunal questions the amount of due diligence necessary and was it carried out to ascertain no previous remnants of cargo were present.

11:35 hrs

The Tribunal further asks who the master is answerable to and questions the survey report and asks for the origin of 3 foreign objects in the cargo. The Tribunal cracks upon the claimants submissions so as to having too many presumptions. They further ask the Counsel to sum up his arguments.

11:45 hrs

The Second speaker starts with the issue of Counter Claim being time barred, The tribunal grills the unawareness of the authority cited and relied upon, regarding set off by the speaker. Tribunal questions the claimants on damages arising due to the presence of lumps of Tar in the cargo, the speaker contends that the respondents are responsible for any damages and liabilities arising out of loading which is the issue was in this case. The tribunal states that according to the charter party, it is the responsibility of the owner to check the ship before unloading.

11:55 hrs

The Counsel is questioned about the difference between demurrage and detention and further what was imposed in the present case. The Claimants are asked to wind up the arguments in a minute.

12:00 hrs

The respondents now proceed with rebuttals and lead with situation where the claimants have mislead the tribunal. They point out the wide disparity between the damages claimed.

12:10 hrs

This brings us to the end of the first Semi Final.

Semi Final 2 NLIU vs ILS

Semi Final 2

12:50 hrs

The claimant starts with stating about the letter of indemnity responding to the question of the bench on the nature of the Letter in question. Further the question is regarding the subject matter of the warranty.

13:01 hrs

The claimant goes on to submit about the letter of warranty and what the implied warranty was as the shipowner. The tribunal asks about what the warranty actually was and where does the scope of compensation come from. The Counsel goes on defining warranty but is unable to convince the bench for the same.

13:16 hrs

The Bench though not satisfied asks the Counsel to move onto his next submission. Counsel now moves on to ascertain the liability of the respondent during loading but the bench further questions the duty of the master which was appointed by the claimant and hence asks about the duty of the Claimants.

13:24 hrs

Claimant now takes help of judicial decisions to prove their submission regarding the addendum to be signed without any prejudice. He concludes with stating about the demurrage clause and are asked about the deviation clause of the charter party.

13:38 hrs

The Respondent’s Counsel begins with the lack of Jurisdiction of the Tribunal and for the same the bench questions about the nature of the letter in question. The counsel contends that the charter party provides for jurisdiction in England and not Navigonia. Further the contents and intention of the Letter is further questioned by the bench.

13:47 hrs

The counsel now moves to the report by quarantine officers and how they have stated about the remnants of the previous cargo. He further moves to conclude his arguments by stating the responsibility of the owner to provide the crane-man and wench-man.

14:02 hrs

The Second speaker for the Respondents starts with the issue of the Port being prospectively safe. Further she talks about embargo being the source of prospective unsafe port, which is not an inherent reason of the port being unsafe. She moves on further to the issue of renomination of the port.

14:09 hrs

The bench asks the counsel to define what a voyage exactly means and further about the date of NOR being granted. The exchange further goes on with the team being grilled on the owners of the cargo. Further submitting that the delay was caused by unforeseen circumstances.

14:14 hrs

Counsel is asked to summarize all the issue and finish the arguments in a minute. Counsel ends with the issue of payment made which was unreasonable as it was done without the agreement of the respondents.

14:19 hrs

Claimants start with Rebuttals laying down point-wise issues to which the Respondents conclude with the Sur-Rebuttals stating the answers to all the points raised by the Claimants.

14:21 hrs

This brings us to the end of Second Semi-Final. The judges and participants now break for lunch.

15:15 hrs

The results are out the finalists are NLIU & RGNUL

16:00 hrs Final (RGNUL vs NLIU)

Finals (left to right) Mr. Sameer Shah, Retd. Justice VVS Rao, Justice Dr. B R Sarangi, Mr. Amitava Majumdar, Mr. Ajay Thomas


The Finals of the 5th NLUO International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2018 (IMAM) are underway. The claimants start their submissions with stating the jurisdiction clause. They further state the LMAA terms 2017 and move ahead with sating the facts of the case.

16:03 hrs

The claimant speaker contending that the Letter in question was a letter of indemnity and the respondent conceded to the fact before the actual obligation to indemnify arose.

16:09 hrs

The speaker moves onto the claims due to the presence of lumps of solidified tar. Further the Bench allows the Counsel to proceed with the issues and to be questioned later.

16:17 hrs

The speaker moves onto the issue of availability of safe port, and how it was the duty of the respondents to make availability of a safe port during the period of embargo.

16:23 hrs

The bench asks the claimants to clearly state the breaches that they are claiming against the Respondents.

16:27 hrs

The Claimants proceed with their prayer to conclude their submissions.

16:32 hrs

The Tribunal questions the claimant on their reliance over American case laws in an English Tribunal. Further they pose questions on the wordings of the LOI.

16:40 hrs

The claimants enter a detailed argument on art 5 of the Hague Visby Rules.  With this argument the claimants have rested their case.

16:48 hrs

The Tribunal is now hearing the respondents first submission wherein they seek to oust the Jurisdiction of the tribunal.

16:55 hrs

The respondent cleverly addresses the arbitrators concern briefly before deferring the question to his co-council. The respondents also seem to have worked on the feedback provided by the judges in the semis of working on their time management as they seem to be making a conscious effort to lead the tribunal to their next submission.

17:00 hrs

The Respondent speaker moves to his second issue and discusses about the clause 18 of the charter party. The bench asserts the reason for rejection was not only NWG based on the phrase ‘Inter alia’.

17:08 hrs

The Second Counsel for the respondent starts her submissions by stating that the embargo imposed is an exception to the addendum, she carries on by defining a safe port and also specifically dealing with abnormalities. Further she defines how the embargo was within the ambit of such ambiguities. She submits that the embargo enforced was not the inherent characteristics of the port and the vessel was prospectively safe.

17:16 hrs

Counsel further moves ahead and submits that the delay was caused beyond the control of the Charterers, as the entry of NWG was not prohibited and the embargo came as a jolt. She submits that the respondents were not under obligation to renominate the port as it might have been an infringement to the third party rights.

17:23 hrs

The bench asks the Respondents to clear what their counter claim is to which the counsel is unable to satisfy the bench with the submissions regarding the same.

 17:33 hrs

The bench now proceeds with questioning the claimants on their submissions. The Counsels facing a barrage of queries from the bench and are having a tough time answering them.

17:45 hrs

With this we come to the conclusion of the Finale. The winner to be announced in a few minutes.

18:30 hrs

The Valedictory ceremony is under way with the Vice Chancellor of National Law University Odisha delivering the opening address and also highlighting the importance of mooting and how the occasion in itself is an opportunity for young mooters.

The guest of honor Justice B R Sarangi relives his college days and how the mooting culture has changed from time and how more competitive it has become. He congratulated all the teams participating in the competition and wished them luck for future.

19:00 hrs



The Results are out

The award for Best Oralist goes to Romit Kohli from NLUD.
The award for Best Memorial goes to RMLNLU
The Runners Up are RGNUL
The Winners of 5th NLUO International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2018 (IMAM) are NLIU.

Dr. Ananya Chakrabarty delivered the vote of thanks and formally concluded the Competition.

This brings us to the end of The 5th NLUO International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2018 (IMAM).
It was a pleasure bringing you the live blog, we will be back next year, until then Goodbye!

Law School NewsMoot Court Announcements

Jindal Global Law School (JGLS) announces the 3rd Annual Jindal Technology, Law & Policy Moot, 2018, to be held from 22nd to 25th March 2018.
Mooting has formed an integral part of legal education at Jindal Global Law School, and students have been encouraged to take up mooting as an important exercise which helps hone skills essential to the practice of law. Mooting experience inevitably holds students in good stead when entering the legal profession and provides them with an upper-edge. The JGLS Moot Court Society is a student led initiative, which works hand-in-hand with the administration for planning, training and executing its activities at JGLS. With laurels at prestigious International Competitions such as Vis Vienna Moot Court Competition, the Price Media Law Moot Court (University of Oxford), the Frankfurt International Investment Moot, as well as consistent good performance at domestic moots, the MCS hopes to create a strong tradition of successful mooting for years to come.
The Annual Jindal Technology Law & Policy Moot Court Competition (Jindal Moot) is the next step in advancing this excellent culture of mooting at JGLS. First organised in the year 2016, the Jindal Moot exposes participants from across the country and beyond to cutting-edge, contemporary and complex issues on Intellectual Property Law as well as other allied fields of law. The previous two editions of the Moot have dealt with issues relating to international investment, anti-competitive conduct in relation to standard essential patents and anti-competitive effects of injunctive relief. They have also raised compelling questions like whether the statutory rights under the Patents Act may be waived via a contract, or how should the rates of royalty be computed? This year’s edition carries forward this tradition of raising topical and unsettled questions, and revolves around the interface of Intellectual Property Law and International Trade Law.

For more imformation, click HERE

Law School NewsLive Blogging

Day 1: Underway- The Ninth NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition

The Ninth NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition has been inaugurated in the presence of Dean I.P. Massey.  The registrations and exchange of memorials between the teams was concluded while the Researchers were rallying forward with the Researcher’s Test!

The competition is now truly underway as post the Inaugural Ceremony and a great lunch the preliminary rounds are scheduled to start at 4:30 PM. This year’s Antitrust Moot is truly unique and stands out amongst all other Moots in the country with the introduction of the Octa-Final and the Reverse Octa-Final Rounds!

Inaugural ceremony

About the new Octa-Final Rounds

The top sixteen teams from the Preliminary Rounds will proceed to the Octa Final rounds and the Reverse Octa Final Rounds. These will be carried out on the basis of power matchups. We’ll leave it to our team head, Amrita, to explain how this makes the competition even better!

“Ever been to a moot where you lost in the prelims by a close margin to the winning team? Thought your prelims with the team should have gone on to be the finals? Felt that you lost because luck did not favour you? We understand that is quite disheartening after months of hard work.

Fear not. Luck is going to have a minimal role this year at Antitrust. We bring to you the octa-final and the reverse-octa final rounds where matches are made on merit and not luck. Bring only your hard-work and determination to win the trophy.

You don’t need those odds in your favour, you have got the rules in your favour!”

– Amrita Shivaprasad, Tabulation Team Head, Antitrust, 2018

18:45 PM: Preliminary rounds wrapped up.

The preliminary rounds have concluded. The reverse preliminary rounds will now begin shortly. The results of the preliminary and reverse-preliminary rounds are scheduled to be announced after dinner at 9:30 PM. The teams who are progressing to the Octa-Final rounds will then have an exchange of memorials with their matchups.


Day 2: Octa Final rounds and 3rd Antitrust Panel Discussion

9:30 AM: Octa Final Rounds

The participants progressing to the Octa Finals underwent their rounds at 9:30. In the 2nd set of rounds, i.e., the Reverse Octa Finals, the participants will face another set of power matches. The reverse Octa Finals shall begin shortly after the 3rd Antitrust Panel Discussion.


Participants in the Octa Finals Rounds
Judges grilling the participants

11:30 AM: Third NLU Jodhpur Panel Discussion on Antitrust Law

With the first set of Octa Final rounds over, preparations are in full swing for the reverse Octa Final Rounds. Meanwhile, participants attended the 3rd Antitrust Panel Discussion, 2018.

Participants attending the 3rd Antitrust Panel Discussion
The Panel

The topic for this year’s Discussion,   was ” Competition and Innovation: Is it time for a new approach?“. The changing facets of antitrust regulation, in light of the digital economy, were discussed. The panel consisted of the following persons.

Anand Kumar Singh

Anand Kumar Singh completed his LLM in corporate laws from the National Law University Jodhpur. He is currently an Assistant Professor at NLUJ, where he has such as Corporate Governance, and Constitutional Governance.

Anandh Venkataramani

Anandh Venkataramani is a 2011 graduate of Symbiosis Law School, Pune. Upon graduating, he worked in the litigation team of Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan for two years. He then pursued his masters from New York University School of Law, focusing on antitrust and litigation. He passed the New York Bar and worked with judges at the New York Supreme Court and the California Court of Appeal. He subsequently joined the Competition Team at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, where he worked on contentious cases in the agriculture and biotech; real estate; social media; mobile app-based communication and transport, and automotive industries. He is currently practicing in the courts in Delhi.

Indrajeet Sircar

Indrajeet Sircar, an Antitrust and International Trade lawyer, graduated from West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata in 2013. Thereafter, he worked for two years as an Associate in the competition law practice at AZB & Partners where he regularly advice clients on a variety of contentious and non-contentious antitrust issues. He is currently a Consultant with the Disputes, Regulatory, Advocacy and Policy (DRAP) group at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.

Prateek Bhattacharya

Prateek Bhattacharya graduated from NLU Jodhpur in 2012 with a specialization in International Trade and Investment. He was thereafter awarded the Dr. Angela Merkel – Jawaharlal Nehru scholarship to pursue his LL.M. in Germany, and graduated from the Europa Institut, Saarland University . He then joined erstwhile Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co, and is currently a Senior Associate at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, New Delhi.

1:30 PM: The Reverse-Octa Final rounds are now slated to begin. The matchups with the university names shall be disclosed shortly thereafter.

6 PM: Results of Octa Final Rounds

The results of the Octa Final rounds are in! The teams progressing to the Quarter Final Rounds are as follows:

  1. DSNLU, Vishakhapatnam
  2. School of Law, Sastra University
  3. NLSIU, Bangalore
  4. RMLNLU, Lucknow
  5. Government Law College, Mumbai
  6. Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law Delhi University
  7. HNLU, Raipur
  8. Symbiosis Law School, Pune

Best of luck to all the teams!

From the above 8 Teams, The following teams progressed to the Semi Final Rounds:

  1. School of Law, Sastra University
  2. NLSIU, Bangalore
  3. RMLNLU, Lucknow
  4. Government Law College, Mumbai

After a grueling Semi-Final Rounds, NLSIU and Sastra University were chosen to battle it out in the Final Rounds.


Day 3: Final Rounds and Valedictory Ceremony

Final Rounds

NLSIU Bangalore emerged victorious in the Final Round of the competition and took the crown of the winner of the 9th NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition.

Final Rounds

Valedictory Ceremony

The award winners of the 9th NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition were as follows:

Best researcher: Ms. Alfiya Vora, Symbiosis Law School, Pune

Best Memorial: Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University

Best Student Advocate: Mr. Vikas Muralidharan, School of Law, SASTRA University

Second Best Student Advocate: Mr. Surya Teja SS Nalla, School of Law, SASTRA University

Winners: National Law School of India University, Bengaluru

Runner-Up: School of Law, SASTRA University

Best Student Advocate of Finals: Mr. Apurv Jain, National Law School of India University, Bengaluru

Valedictory Ceremony

With that, the competition has come to a conclusion. We hope this was an enriching experience for all the participants! A heartfelt congratulations to all the award winners from all of us here at NLU Jodhpur.

Law School NewsLive Blogging

The 1st P.A.Inamdar International Moot Court Competition organized by CNLU, Patna in collaboration with MCE Society’s A.K.K.New Law Academy, Pune, witnessed the enthusiastic participation from 33 esteemed law universities across the nation. These teams would be competing in the 3-day long event, starting from the 1st of April till the 3rd of April, which looks to be extremely promising and competitive from the enthusiasm displayed by all the participants and organizers at the inaugural ceremony. This inaugural ceremony was attended by all the students, teaching and non-teaching staff of CNLU, and the participating teams. The draw of lots, determining which team would go up against which teams in the rounds of oral arguments from 10 a.m. on 2nd of April, 2016, followed the inaugural ceremony.

The inaugural ceremony was graced by the august presence of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi, High Court of Judicature of Patna at Patna and Shri P.K.Shahi, Advocate General and former Education Minister of the Govt. of Bihar. The ceremony started with the floral welcome to Shri P.K.Shahi by Ms. Shaista Peerzada, member of MCE Society, and to Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi by Mr. Kumar Gaurav, faculty of CNLU. Prof A. Lakshminath, Hon’ble V.C. of CNLU, delivered the welcome address, which was filled with much encouragement for participants and organizers alike. He highlighted the importance of mooting in the path of excelling in the profession of law. Aarush and Mallika, excelled in their task of being the anchors of the ceremony with the much required grace and poise. Ms Nandita S.Jha, the moot co-ordinator who has been extremely instrumental in the organization of the competition, welcomed the teams and shed light on significance of mooting.

We are proud to host the following Teams-

1. Alliance School of Law, Alliance University
2. Amity Law School, Amity University, Lucknow (AUUP)
3. Amity Law School, Noida
4. Army Institute of Law
5. Central University of South Bihar, Gaya
6. Delhi Metropolitan education (GGSIU)
7. DSNLU, Vishakhapatnam
8. Faculty of Law, Allahabad University
9. Faculty of Law, Aligarh Muslim University
10. Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University
11. Faculty of Law, Law Centre , Delhi university
12. Faculty of Law, Lucknow University
13. GNLU, Gandhinagar
14. Government Law College, Mumbai
15. ICFAI Dehradun
16. IMS Unison School of Law, Dehradun
17. Indian Institute of Legal Studies Siliguri
18. JEMTEC Schhol of Law, Noida
19. KLE Societies’s Law College, Bangalore
20. M.S. Rammaiyah Law College, Banagalore
21. NEW Law College, BhartiyaVidyapeeth, Pune
22. NLIU Bhopal
23. NUSRL Ranchi
25. Raffles University, Neemrana (Rajasthan)
26. RGNUL Patiala
27. RMLNLU, Lucknow
28. School of Excellence in Law, Tamil Nadu
29. School of Law KIIT University, Bhubaneswar
30. Seedling School of Law, Jaipur
31. Unity Degree College
32. University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh
33. UPES , Dehradun

We are live now! The teams are battling it out in the Preliminary Rounds.

  • In Court Room No. 4, UILS, Chandigarh met with a rough start where the  judges grilled the first speaker from the petitioners side  on greetings only ,in court room no. 3 during the 1st preliminary round the petitioner’s cited the yogyakarta convention to which Malp is only a signatory and thus the judges refused to hear any further arguments based on the convention, the respondent equated Palshtia with Islam and the judge questioned the knowledge of the counsel about the various religions around the world.The counsel cited a judgement of the Odissa High Court and was arguing on the  facts only which did not go well down with the judges. In court rooom no. 1 during prelium round 1 the second speaker of side petitioner was not aware of doctrine of nexus.
  • In court room no. 1 the rebuttals from one of the sides were based on a arguments which were never raised in the oral submissions the judges looked baffled and the same was pointed out to the team later.
  • According to the blogging team room no. 6 was the most interesting bench of judges who shook the confidence of the counsel pleading before them.They made the counsel on the side petitioner to quote Constitution of India and then grilled them on how in the territory of Malp was the Indian Constitution applicable.initially when the side petitioner brought up the maintainability of the writ , they were asked to prove where the side respondent had challenged the maintainability and if not then why was it being raised .The respondent side in the same room were ignorant about the terms class legislature and intelligible differentia.
  • In court room no 5 the judges came down heavily on the respondent on the deficiency of the MEB and was on the verge of outrightly rejecting the further submissions of the council  calling it an outright violation of minority rights .
  • By the second preliminary round the judges gained momentum which proved to be deadly for the teams .Be it jurisdiction ,LGBT rights or the Naaz foundation case  the teams were grilled and roasted on questions of law and facts.The first speaker from NLIU Bhopal from side respondent could not satisfy the judge’s queries within the prescribed time limit.










WINNERS:Rs 15000

RUNNERS UP :Rs 10000


2nd BEST MEMORIAL: Rs 5000


2nd BEST SPEAKER : Rs 5000

4.08 pm: In court room no. 4 ground for challenging the circular was being questioned to shake the confidence of the counsel. Counsel made a blunder calling legislature as legislation and thus dug a pit for itself.judges smiling for counsel’s ignorance.

4.12 pm: Judges yet to arrive in the court room 5 LETHARGY PREVAILS!

4.15 pm:In court room no 3, heat rising, judges push the counsel to the backfoot asking them why supreme court and not the high court .counsel trying to plead ignorance,judges not accepting the same. PIL under question .

4.18 pm: In court room no. 6, the judges asking the counsel why it should accept foreign cases.the judge asserts that 3rd gender will only be transgender.

4.18 pm: In court room no. 3 hearing of second counsel  begins.court roo no. 5 stiil waiting for the judge.

4.20 pm: Constitutional morality being questioned by the judges .the answer is satisfactory.

4.22 pm: In court room no. 6 the judge asks how is sexual orientation analogous to the word sex.

4.23 pm: In court room no. 4  to be or not to be is the question.

4.27 pm: Relief for court room no. 5 Finally the judges arrive,browsing through the memos of the court room no6. the judges confuse the counsel between ICCPR and ICSCR seems like a turning point in the argument.

4.28 pm: In court room no 6. counsel a little nervous as judges say it is the work of legislature and not judiciary to include sexual orientation into sex.

4.30 pm: Judges comment enough compassion shown by the institution as Mrs x is allowed to continue as a student in court room no. 6

4.31 pm: In court room 4, the judges comment that nothing which is submitted by the counsel is either persuasive or binding.

4.32 pm: In court room no. 5 the judges love their sandwiches grilled, not allowing the counsel to proceed with further issues

4.34 pm: In court room no 6 the judge is questioning the locus standi of the PIL .Principle of natural justice forms one part of the argument by the counsel.

4.35 pm: In court room no. 6 the judges ask how this religion is compared to islam.the judges demand in court room no. 5 if the counsel is aware of the facts .

4.36 pm: Court room no. 3, misleading might be injurious to your case.

4.39 pm: in court room no. 3 the counsel is unaware of the facts of the case.

4.40 pm: In court room no. 5 judges ask the counsel if legal righ is being violated by denying her hostel rights.the judges dont seem to adhere with the idea of justice. BICHARE BACCHE!!

4.44 pm: 1st speaker from NLIU takes the dias to present his arguments.

4.46 pm: In court rooom no. 5, our sponsor is under question- P. A.  Inamdar vs State of Maharashta.judge asks the counsel to present the copy of the judgement.minority colleges have a qualified right to protect their belief judges say.

4.48 pm: In room no. 5 the judges ask the counsel to be Buddha and enlighten the counsel with their immense knowledge.meanwhile who wants grilled counsels ,OH ! i meant sandwiches!!!

4.50 pm: In court room no. 4 , it took time because the person coordinating was lovestruck.

4.59 pm: Judges ask will the people be asked to sit naked later in the examination .

5.00 pm: In court room no. 5 the judges call for FIR and the copy of judgement s of 2008 4 SCC. counsel quoting Jeremey Bentham.

5.01 pm: In court room no 4 the principle of Audi Alterem Partem is violated.

5.04 pm: Counsel fails to distinguish between beef ban and hijab ban thereby inviting wrath of the court room no. 4 the judges warn the counsel of not to be elective and selective of facts.

5.05 pm: In court room no. 5,the judges seem to not accept the arguments. the counsel may just cry. koi paani pilao use.

5.10 pm: The counsel is ready  to strip down people if it is to curb cheating.SAVE YOURSELF PEOPLE!!!

5.11 pm: Shia Sunni  concept being involved in   room no. 6.

5.15 pm: Counsel exhausted ,asks for water.Judges doubly charged


5.21 pm: Our convenor is charged now!

5.29 pm: Our fallen comrade is back in action in room no. 5.

5.30 pm: The timer clearly does not want the moot to continue ,shows the time up placard. This moot is turning to be a daily soap.

5.32 pm: Its been a long time in the mot and the counsel is still proving the maintainability and the locus standi. Counsel confused between the high court and supreme court. GOD SAVE THE JUDGES FROM COUNSEL OR WAIT……VICE VERSA

5.44 pm: The counsel raises the point of nexus. Wanted to hear it from so long.

5.45 pm: The round finally comes to an end!!!

So, after a long scintillating grilling rounds the names of the four ready to eat grilled cheese smoked sandwiches are below




We are back! With all the preparations for the semis and final rounds going on, with all the anticipation on the faces of the participants, this day surely is going to be the most competitive one!

We would begin with the live updates as soon as the rounds begin! Stay tuned in to support your teams!

So the proceedings have begun!

11.20 a.m.:In Court Room No. 4, counsel starts by trying to dodge the questions of the judges on Art 25 and presenting a considerable number of commentaries to prove her point on Art 32.

11.21 a.m.:The judges seem to be happy this morning! Thety are patiently listening to the counsel but the counsel’s confidence is a bit shaken when it came to the application of intelligible differentia.

11.22 a.m.: A good day for the petititoners in Court Room 3! The judges are quite satisfied with the arguments! Let’s see how well the counsel manages to tackle the questions of law and facts that are being thrown at by the judges!

11.25 a.m.: Not that a happy day for the counsel in Court Room No. 5 because the judges are posing to be extremely orthodox and making things not-so-easy for the counsel!

Court Room No. 4: TERROR RULES!

11.29 a.m.: Judges is court room no 3 are real patient listeners and have finished listening to the counsel! We hop the co-counsel is also shown equal compassion!

11.35: A real good day for petitioners in Court Room no.3! The co-counsel is also presenting her arguments beautifully without any interruption from the judges.

11.43: An unusual happening in Court Room No. 4! The co-counsel who looked pretty confident while approaching the dais is stating the jurisdiction and facts of the case!

The judges for the semi finals are senior advocates of the Patna High Court, Additional Solicitor General of Patna High Court and District judges of Patna and Vaishali.

11. 53 a.m.: Judges in Court Room No. 4 are very energetic! The counsel is being bombarded with questions from the bench!

12.03 P.M.: Real trouble for petitioners in Court room no. 4! The definition of lesbians given by them did not go very well with the judges! The move which was intended to be smart has actually backfired!

12.05 P.M. Lethargy in the court Room No. 4 has forced us to send our veteran on to it. No grilling , pretty boring.

12.13 P.M. Finally some energy in court room-4. Second counsel hilariously starts pleading.

12.14 P.M. Petitioners summed up their pleading with the prayer but soon it is interrupted; judges just can’t keep it to themselves.

12.19 P.M. Judges put questions over Intelligible diffrentia.  It seems that judges are back in action.

12.21 P.M. The smiles that judges just passed is unnerving cause people are unaware if they went like Okay! you are screwed or Okay! You are taken !!!

12.23 P.M. In court room 3.  Validity of order by the university is put to question.

12.25 P.M. In court room 3 judges ask if there was furtherance of her lesbian character.

12.30 P.M. Counsel brings up matter of personal vendetta! (Okay!! a bit exaggerated!!) Judges reject.

12.31 P.M. In court room 3 judges ask to “enlighten” them on the idea of discrimination.

12.32 P.M. Court room 4 the respondent’s counsel is shocked as the judges out rightly reject the argument. Do you need a doctor for the attack ?!!

12.34 P.M. Court room 3 judges asked why is the counsel advocating only one party as the minority.

12.35 P.M. Judges try  to roast sometimes…..enough grilling has been done!

12.36 P.M. Sur rebuttals going on !

12.37 P.M. These smart phones wont allow our comrades to stay put! Court room 3 a fall back!

12.44P.M. Judges ask the respondents to forget about the petitioner and advocate the minority as a whole!

12.50 P.M. Judges are steaming the counsel for their lapses and forcing them to plead ignorance.

12. 51 P.M. Judges proved that a lawyer with a brief case can rob more than armed robbers.

12. 58  P.M Judges : Its not the counsel’s job to deal with law and order rather counsel should focus on public order which falls under its domain.

1.45 p.m Goodness gracious me! That was some real intense argumentation that took place in Court room No.4!  The proceedings have come to an end now. The judges even refused to patiently listen to teams during rebuttals. However, the teams have successfully managed to keep their calm and finish what they started;But I am being asked to praise the teams as they pleaded long enough to loose cool on us and we do fear beatings.



The finals would see UILS CHANDIGARH and NLIU BHOPAL battle it out!


3.43 pm

The judges have arrived . the first counsel proceeds with the facts and the arguments and it seems that the temperature is rising.


The judges seem engrossed in the arguments advanced . the judges are grilling them on the cases cited , but the counsel easily escapes . article 13 is being used to defend the argument.


The judges are going through the constitution and the rights of the minorities and clarification of this is being argued.the counsel takes a stand on the test of arbritrariness


Para 18  of the statement of facts clearly states that state of malp acccepts LGBT cited by the counsel.


Misuse of article 31 is being raised and the right to maladministration is being argued upon by the counsel


A case is being cited by the counsel which does not relate to the arguments raised,meanwhile the judges are discussing among judges look in a mood to grill them bombarding them with questions like how do you compare human dignity with lesbianism.


The counsel pleads the Nalsa judgement but it seems that they are helpless because the judges are unwilling to accept it.


Everybody seems so engrossed in the arguments ,meanwhile the judges ask the counsel to wind up.


The second counsel approaches the dias  .it seems that judges are not pleaased in being addressed as you lordship and hence they have requested the counsel to address the bench with your honour.Laughter prevails in the room.


The concept of burqha is being questioned by the judges.judges seem inquisitive that whether the client will wear the burqha before the doctor.The essential religious practice is in question.At this point the counsel seems to satisfy the inquisitiveness of the judge.


the judges seem to discuss among themselves .


the contention put forth by the counsel relates to the rights of the individual and the society.

Here we are with the results but first something else

The last day of the 1st P.A. Inamdar International Moot Court Competition 2016,  based on rights of minorities as well as rights of LGBT community, started with the semi-final rounds wherein UILS Chandigarh were up against KIIT University parallel to the  AIL, Mohali vs. NLIU Bhopal. The semi-finals were adjudicated by Mr.S.D. Sanjay, Additional General of Patna High Court. Mr. B.N. Pandey, Registrar, vigilance, Patna High Court, Mr. A.K. Upadhayay, Standing Counsel, Patna High Court, Sri Om Prakash, member, Bihar State legal services Authority, Mr. Birendra Kumar, District judge of Patna and Mr. A.K. Jain, District Judge of Vaishali. After a round of intense argumentation, UILS Chandigarh and NLIU Bhopal qualified for the final. The final Round was adjudicated by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mr. Hemant Gupta, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh, Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ahsanuddin Ammanullah, the Hon’ble judges of Patna High Court. Hon’ble Justice Mr. A K Trivedi and  Hon’ble Justice Mr. R. K. Mishra were also sitting in the audience.

The three daylong event came to an end with the valedictory ceremony which was presided by acting CJ of Patna High Court Hon’ble Mr. Justice Iqbal Ahmed Ansari. The valedictory ceremony started with the presentation of bouquet by miss Juhi Tiwari student of CNLU, and to Dr. Rashid Sheikh by Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Faculty CNLU. Prof. A. Lakshminath, Hon’ble V.C. CNLU, delivered the welcome address and appreciated the efforts of the organizers and healthy competitive spirits of the participants. The anchors of the ceremony, Harshit and Anubhuti gave a briefing of the competition and about Mr. P.A. Inamdar, President of M.C.E. society Pune. The chief guest address was given by Justice Ansari where he stressed upon the need of competitions like this and explained why mooting is an integral part of acquiring legal acumen. The Hon’ble Justice also emphasised on how mooting helps an aspiring advocate to develop his lawyering skills from a very young stage of his career. The much awaited results of the winners were announced by Ms. Nandita S. Jha who had played a pivotal role in organising the event. Registrar of the University Dr. S.P.Singh, proposed the vote of thanks.

Enough already now the cake the winners and not so much a winner (we meant the second and all):

  1. Winners: NLIU Bhopal
  2. Runner up: UILS Chandigarh
  3. Best Memorial: School of Law,KIIT
  4. Second best memorial:NLIU,Bhopal
  5. Best Mooter: Aarushi Pandey,UPES Dehradun
  6. Second Best Mooter: Shrishti Thakral , DSNLU Dehradun.

Like all good things this must end




we have more we’ll be back with video for the finals though not very good as u know photography in court rooms not allowed so its a sneak peek

just for the record it is not a issue that this fun is over new friends you made will be gone because






(Oyeshee Gupta

Shirish Chandra

Swetank Sharma

Vaibhav Shukla

Himanshu Aggarwal

Aman Naqvi

Rishikesh Kumar

Rishika Sharma

and how can we forget Pratyush Kaushik sir)