Avneet Singh Sikka, Partner at Candidlex Advisors LLP, shares his journey from science to humanities and eventually to law, reflecting resilience, mentorship, and a deep commitment to courtroom advocacy. As a first generation lawyer with no professional connections, he built his foundation through patience, rigorous trial court practice, and the guidance of seasoned mentors. From handling complex arbitration and commercial litigation matters to appearing before various forums, his journey highlights the discipline, persistence, and strategic thinking essential for success in litigation.
This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
Coming from a humanities background, what inspired you to pursue law as a career, and how did that transition shape your early professional journey?
I studied science until High School, then shifted to humanities during under graduation, and finally ended up studying law. When I entered Dyal Singh College, I was a young boy, somewhat detached from the harsher realities of life. Gradually, I got sensitised about issues such as abuse of power, communal tensions, and the darker ambitions that sometimes drive individuals.
That made me realise that I have to become a strong person, one who cannot be intimidated. I come from a family of businessmen and I was supposed to follow the footsteps of my father, being the elder son. However, I chose a different path and embraced the profession of law.
Studying science in school taught me to understand the concepts rather than memorise them for examinations. That approach proved invaluable in law school as well.
In the formative years of your career, what factors or experiences played a defining role in building your foundation?
I have been fortunate to find honest and sincere mentors in my life. Since I am a first-generation advocate, I had no contacts in this profession. It all started when my first senior, Mr. Bakshi Siri Rang Singh, a civil law veteran, decided to be my mentor for life. He taught me patience. He insisted that I should not rush my career and instead spend ample time in trial courts. Trial court advocacy builds the foundation of an advocate. When I eventually moved forward in my career, I realised that I had no reason to feel hesitant before hearings. Whenever anxiety crept in, I reminded myself that I had prepared the brief and already had a grasp over the law on the issue.
From your initial roles to becoming a Partner, which phase of your journey would you describe as the turning point in your practice, and why?
After spending time in two chambers, first with Bakshi sir and then with Mr. Vineet Mehta, I joined Candidlex, a boutique law firm, in the last quarter of 2019. Here, I was gradually entrusted with handling cases independently. That independence brought responsibility. If a mistake was made, it was mine. If an order was not complied with, I had to face the court.
I began winning cases, which built confidence. Then I lost cases as well and that made me wise. I guess all these ups and downs at last made me an advocate.
Could you share one of the most challenging cases you have handled and how you prepared yourself to navigate its complexities?
There are two matters that stand out.
The first was an arbitration against the Punjab School Education Board. My client had supplied paper to the Board and they deducted roughly around Rs. 1 Crore on technical grounds. My biggest hurdle was a lab test report relied upon by the Board as evidence of sterling quality. However, during cross-examination I was able to demonstrate that the report was a self-serving document which was prepared at a later stage to justify the deductions, and hence cannot be relied upon.
Second was a case where my clients approached me after they were convicted by the Trial Court for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. I was astonished at how meticulously the complainant had framed the case against them. I had to examine every minor inconsistency and navigate through each gap in the complainant’s evidence. Final arguments extended over four lengthy hearings. At last, the Appellate Court was convinced, and my clients were acquitted.
The key is to give time to a case. Reading the file multiple times is very important. The human mind tends to miss finer details in the first reading. What seems like a dead case at first glance often reveals strong arguments when we dive deep into the record.
Having appeared in several high-stake matters, how do you maintain composure and strategic clarity under pressure?
There is a breathing technique I follow. I don’t know whether it helps or not but I try to believe myself that it helps. The goal is to reach a state where I have complete awareness of my breath. Breathing is usually subconscious. I try to reach a moment where I consciously feel every breath while inhaling and exhaling.
Since the beginning of your practice, how have you seen the insolvency landscape in India evolve, and what key challenges do you believe exist in the current framework?
I began appearing before the NCLT in 2018. At that time, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was considered a very powerful piece of legislation. The initiation of CIRP have drastic effects on the management of the company, and everyone was afraid of it, particularly the real estate developers.
In its early phase, insolvency petitions were used more as a tool for recovery than for company resolution and restructuring. Over time, the framework evolved, but I believe that the insolvency regime is still in its nascent stage. IBC came into force in December 2016, and one still finds company petitions registered in 2017 pending on the board of NCLTs.
The Supreme Court while upholding the constitutional validity of the Code in Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India observed that the object of the IBC is to resolve corporate insolvency in a time bound manner which the previous legislations like the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 were found to have failed to achieve such objects. The root cause of delay, in my view, is the lack of infrastructure and the limited number of benches handling a massive caseload. I hope things will improve in time.
What advice would you offer to law students aspiring to build a high-stake litigation or insolvency practice? How can they begin preparing while still in law school?
See, it’s a long road, truly a long one. I have often been anxious, questioning whether I was on the right path or moving toward success, and that can’t be figured out. So, I made a promise to myself; to show up every day and keep moving forward. If i say it in hindi “Harta wahi hai jo ruk jata hai” meaning the one who loses is the one who stops.
Law students aiming to build a career in practice must sincerely read and understand the important statutes. The key is to identify your areas of interest and build conceptual clarity in that domain. During active practice, you will rarely find time to study foundational principles of law. Now is the time to read and understand. The judge is reading the same book as you. If you have a grasp over the concept, any day you will outperform your adversary in court.
Looking ahead, how do you envision the future of your practice evolving, and what milestones do you aspire to achieve in the coming years?
I am increasingly drawn toward the art of courtroom advocacy. There are advocates who command respect when they argue. The Judge listens attentively, the court staff appreciates the argument, the people sitting behind observe in admiration, and sometimes even the opposing counsel says a few words of appreciation.
I aspire to become such an advocate. For the next 10 years, I guess I will just enjoy this profession and perhaps, one day, if the court deems me worthy, I may have the honour of being designated as a Senior Advocate.
Get in touch with Avneet Singh Sikka –
