In any family dispute, the most effective outcomes come when a person can separate emotions from business decision-making. This enables warring parties to focus on objective self-interest, long-term family stability, and business success, says Munaf Virjee, founder of AMR Law. He is representing one of the promoters of Anchor Group, Hemang Shah, in a dispute with his brother, Mehul Shah, and also Gaurav Ghai, Chairman of Graviss Group, which owns and operates the Baskin-Robbins brand in the SAARC region, in a dispute with his father, Ravi Ghai. In an interview about a two-decade veteran, Virjee tells ET’s Maulik Vyas about educating warring parties to separate emotions from business practicalities that could bring long-term sustainable solutions. Edited excerpts:
You advise and represent parties in India’s most high-profile business family disputes. What is your single biggest learning from these emotionally and commercially complex situations?
In any business family dispute, there are normally two factors at play – one is financial and legal, which we all can understand, whilst the other is emotional and deeply personal, often stemming from issues or grievances going back decades. The interplay between these two factors is key to successfully addressing and resolving family disputes. The financial and legal issues are, for me as a lawyer, more straightforward to address; they arise in all commercial disputes. It is the emotional and personal aspects that are more challenging.
My approach to these disputes is, therefore, to first hear what a client has to say and act as a counsellor before putting my lawyer hat on. This is both to understand my clients and their perspective so that a suitable strategy can be developed and also to get an insight into the opponent and their mindset, strengths, and weaknesses. This often grants an upper hand in a dispute and equally plays a vital role in arriving at a solution.
The most effective outcomes come when clients can separate emotions from decision-making; this enables a client to focus on objective self-interest, long-term stability for the family, and business success. In these matters, I act as a sounding board, assisting my clients to distil their thoughts. I try to give them reality checks gained from my experiences in such matters and then help them make informed decisions.
I normally caution my clients that family-legal disputes can become all-consuming, mentally exhausting, and eat into the prime years of one’s life. I remind them that, belonging to a business family and background, they should expend their energies and resources in growing their businesses and leaving a legacy for their next generation, rather than a legacy of family and internal disputes for them to inherit.
What inspired you to found AMR Law, and how has the firm evolved, strategically and culturally, since its founding?
I wanted to build a firm that clients turn to for clarity, strategy, and credibility, all the more when the matters are complex. I was exposed to the law from my childhood, my father also being a lawyer. His discipline, work ethic, professional ethics, and commitment to his clients are qualities I have always tried to emulate. My father also has an independent law practice. I believe this motivated me to start AMR Law. I always had a desire to build something of my own.
Since its inception, AMR Law has evolved consciously and thoughtfully. We believe clients come to us at very sensitive moments in their business or personal lives, so integrity and confidentiality are non-negotiable. Strategically, our approach has been to stay solution-oriented. Not every dispute needs to be fought till the bitter end; sometimes the best strategy is an early, well-structured resolution, and sometimes it is firm courtroom advocacy. The key is to choose the path that protects the client’s long-term interests, not just the immediate short-term win. Culturally, we have built a team that values integrity, preparation, and respect for the court and the client. For lawyers in the firm, we encourage independent thinking and responsibility early on. Young lawyers are trained to be thorough, to communicate clearly, and to act with credibility before the court and clients.
How do you foster continuous learning, mentorship, and professional development at AMR Law, especially as practice areas and client expectations shift?
At AMR Law, we try to build a culture where learning is part of everyday work, not a separate exercise. We encourage our lawyers to engage with emerging practice areas through practical experiences, training and seminars, cross-disciplinary projects, and exposure to complex client matters early in their careers. This not only sharpens technical expertise but also builds adaptability, a skill increasingly vital as client expectations evolve and disputes become increasingly complex. The law is always evolving, and so are client expectations, so we encourage our lawyers to stay curious, read widely, and discuss developments openly within the team. Mentorship happens very organically – seniors work closely with juniors on live matters, involve them in strategy, and give them real responsibility early on. We also place a lot of emphasis on feedback, preparation, and clear thinking. We have an open-door culture where knowledge sharing is organic and continuous. When people feel supported and challenged at the same time, professional growth follows naturally.
What are the key challenges you have faced in building and scaling a law firm in an increasingly competitive, talent-driven market?
In a competitive, talent-driven market, there is always pressure to expand, but the real challenge is to grow without diluting and compromising on quality and standards. Today’s lawyers are ambitious and have many options, so it is important to create an environment where they feel they are learning, trusted with responsibility, and doing meaningful work. Ultimately, the challenge lies in building a sustainable model that nurtures talent, embraces innovation, and delivers consistent value in a market where both clients and professionals have more choices than ever.
The Mediation Act, 2023, marks a significant step in India’s dispute resolution landscape. How do you see it shaping the future of litigation, particularly in family and closely held business disputes?
In my view, its biggest impact will be in encouraging parties to explore out-of-court resolution before entering into a long drawn and expensive litigation. Further, the recognition, enforcement and execution, and especially the timelines in execution, of a mediated settlement agreement are going to play a crucial role in parties deciding on mediation as a form of alternate dispute resolution. This is especially relevant for family and closely held business disputes, where relationships and reputations are as important as legal rights.
That said, mediation works best when parties come with a genuine intent to resolve and when advisors guide clients with a long-term perspective. Litigation will always have its place, but given the onboarding of this Mediation Act, I do see mediation becoming an important first step in sensitive commercial and family disputes going forward. I only hope that the quality and training offered to mediators is improved – the experience we as practitioners have had with Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act has been underwhelming, with few disputes being settled through the mandatory mediation prescribed by that act.
India has long aspired to become a global arbitration hub. What legal, institutional, and cultural changes are still needed to make that ambition real?
India’s ambition to become a global hub for arbitration, whilst commendable, will not fructify till there are various structural reforms. Recent amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act have moved the framework closer to international standards. However, aspects such as the time taken to constitute and appoint an arbitral tribunal by the courts and the time taken to pass other judicial orders under the act, which are often prerequisites to take the arbitration process ahead or to make it effective, require major reforms.
Further, I believe Indian courts need to be more doctrinally disciplined when it comes to interfering with arbitral awards and the arbitral process. Streamlining legislation, expeditious constitution and appointment of the arbitral tribunal, discipline in interference with awards and the arbitral process, expeditious court involvement where warranted, and expeditious and effective enforcement of awards are the needs of the hour. One possibility is that dedicated and specialised arbitration benches/arbitration courts be set up across the country, and especially in major commercial hubs such as Mumbai.
Equally important are institutional developments. India needs arbitral institutions with the stature and independence of Singapore’s SIAC or London’s LCIA or the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce), backed by transparent governance and cutting-edge technology.
Culturally, businesses and lawyers must move away from treating arbitration as “litigation in disguise” and embrace it as a faster, binding alternative and adopt a flexible/practical approach, rather than having the traditional approach and method of dragging litigation for several years. Practitioners must also not treat arbitration as a side engagement, to be undertaken in the evenings only as a supplement to court practice.
Without these systemic changes, India risks remaining aspirational rather than competitive in the global arbitration landscape.
You advise and represent parties in India’s most high-profile business family disputes. What is your single biggest learning from these emotionally and commercially complex situations?
In any business family dispute, there are normally two factors at play – one is financial and legal, which we all can understand, whilst the other is emotional and deeply personal, often stemming from issues or grievances going back decades. The interplay between these two factors is key to successfully addressing and resolving family disputes. The financial and legal issues are, for me as a lawyer, more straightforward to address; they arise in all commercial disputes. It is the emotional and personal aspects that are more challenging.
My approach to these disputes is, therefore, to first hear what a client has to say and act as a counsellor before putting my lawyer hat on. This is both to understand my clients and their perspective so that a suitable strategy can be developed and also to get an insight into the opponent and their mindset, strengths, and weaknesses. This often grants an upper hand in a dispute and equally plays a vital role in arriving at a solution.
The most effective outcomes come when clients can separate emotions from decision-making; this enables a client to focus on objective self-interest, long-term stability for the family, and business success. In these matters, I act as a sounding board, assisting my clients to distil their thoughts. I try to give them reality checks gained from my experiences in such matters and then help them make informed decisions.
I normally caution my clients that family-legal disputes can become all-consuming, mentally exhausting, and eat into the prime years of one’s life. I remind them that, belonging to a business family and background, they should expend their energies and resources in growing their businesses and leaving a legacy for their next generation, rather than a legacy of family and internal disputes for them to inherit.
What inspired you to found AMR Law, and how has the firm evolved, strategically and culturally, since its founding?
I wanted to build a firm that clients turn to for clarity, strategy, and credibility, all the more when the matters are complex. I was exposed to the law from my childhood, my father also being a lawyer. His discipline, work ethic, professional ethics, and commitment to his clients are qualities I have always tried to emulate. My father also has an independent law practice. I believe this motivated me to start AMR Law. I always had a desire to build something of my own.
Since its inception, AMR Law has evolved consciously and thoughtfully. We believe clients come to us at very sensitive moments in their business or personal lives, so integrity and confidentiality are non-negotiable. Strategically, our approach has been to stay solution-oriented. Not every dispute needs to be fought till the bitter end; sometimes the best strategy is an early, well-structured resolution, and sometimes it is firm courtroom advocacy. The key is to choose the path that protects the client’s long-term interests, not just the immediate short-term win. Culturally, we have built a team that values integrity, preparation, and respect for the court and the client. For lawyers in the firm, we encourage independent thinking and responsibility early on. Young lawyers are trained to be thorough, to communicate clearly, and to act with credibility before the court and clients.
How do you foster continuous learning, mentorship, and professional development at AMR Law, especially as practice areas and client expectations shift?
At AMR Law, we try to build a culture where learning is part of everyday work, not a separate exercise. We encourage our lawyers to engage with emerging practice areas through practical experiences, training and seminars, cross-disciplinary projects, and exposure to complex client matters early in their careers. This not only sharpens technical expertise but also builds adaptability, a skill increasingly vital as client expectations evolve and disputes become increasingly complex. The law is always evolving, and so are client expectations, so we encourage our lawyers to stay curious, read widely, and discuss developments openly within the team. Mentorship happens very organically – seniors work closely with juniors on live matters, involve them in strategy, and give them real responsibility early on. We also place a lot of emphasis on feedback, preparation, and clear thinking. We have an open-door culture where knowledge sharing is organic and continuous. When people feel supported and challenged at the same time, professional growth follows naturally.
What are the key challenges you have faced in building and scaling a law firm in an increasingly competitive, talent-driven market?
In a competitive, talent-driven market, there is always pressure to expand, but the real challenge is to grow without diluting and compromising on quality and standards. Today’s lawyers are ambitious and have many options, so it is important to create an environment where they feel they are learning, trusted with responsibility, and doing meaningful work. Ultimately, the challenge lies in building a sustainable model that nurtures talent, embraces innovation, and delivers consistent value in a market where both clients and professionals have more choices than ever.
The Mediation Act, 2023, marks a significant step in India’s dispute resolution landscape. How do you see it shaping the future of litigation, particularly in family and closely held business disputes?
In my view, its biggest impact will be in encouraging parties to explore out-of-court resolution before entering into a long drawn and expensive litigation. Further, the recognition, enforcement and execution, and especially the timelines in execution, of a mediated settlement agreement are going to play a crucial role in parties deciding on mediation as a form of alternate dispute resolution. This is especially relevant for family and closely held business disputes, where relationships and reputations are as important as legal rights.
That said, mediation works best when parties come with a genuine intent to resolve and when advisors guide clients with a long-term perspective. Litigation will always have its place, but given the onboarding of this Mediation Act, I do see mediation becoming an important first step in sensitive commercial and family disputes going forward. I only hope that the quality and training offered to mediators is improved – the experience we as practitioners have had with Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act has been underwhelming, with few disputes being settled through the mandatory mediation prescribed by that act.
India has long aspired to become a global arbitration hub. What legal, institutional, and cultural changes are still needed to make that ambition real?
India’s ambition to become a global hub for arbitration, whilst commendable, will not fructify till there are various structural reforms. Recent amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act have moved the framework closer to international standards. However, aspects such as the time taken to constitute and appoint an arbitral tribunal by the courts and the time taken to pass other judicial orders under the act, which are often prerequisites to take the arbitration process ahead or to make it effective, require major reforms.
Further, I believe Indian courts need to be more doctrinally disciplined when it comes to interfering with arbitral awards and the arbitral process. Streamlining legislation, expeditious constitution and appointment of the arbitral tribunal, discipline in interference with awards and the arbitral process, expeditious court involvement where warranted, and expeditious and effective enforcement of awards are the needs of the hour. One possibility is that dedicated and specialised arbitration benches/arbitration courts be set up across the country, and especially in major commercial hubs such as Mumbai.
Equally important are institutional developments. India needs arbitral institutions with the stature and independence of Singapore’s SIAC or London’s LCIA or the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce), backed by transparent governance and cutting-edge technology.
Culturally, businesses and lawyers must move away from treating arbitration as “litigation in disguise” and embrace it as a faster, binding alternative and adopt a flexible/practical approach, rather than having the traditional approach and method of dragging litigation for several years. Practitioners must also not treat arbitration as a side engagement, to be undertaken in the evenings only as a supplement to court practice.
Without these systemic changes, India risks remaining aspirational rather than competitive in the global arbitration landscape.
