Day 1: 8th November, 2025
The 3rd NLUJ-Trilegal Corporate Law Review Summit 2025, was organized by the Journal on Corporate Law and Governance [“JCLG”] at National Law University, Jodhpur [“NLU Jodhpur”]. The event was sponsored by Trilegal, with SCC Online-SCC Times serving as the knowledge partner.
This summit provided a dynamic platform for the exchange of diverse perspectives and meaningful dialogue, bridging the gap between academic theory and practical application in corporate law a field that forms the foundation of modern economies. Its primary objective was to foster academic engagement, encourage research, and enhance understanding of emerging trends in corporate and commercial law in India.
The first day featured two thought-provoking panel discussions that delved into the intersection of technology, fiduciary responsibility, sustainability, and corporate ethics, followed by paper presentations on the second day from 15 shortlisted candidates selected from over 150 submissions.
Inaugural Ceremony
The Opening Ceremony began with a welcome address by Dr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dean (Academic) of NLU Jodhpur and Faculty-in-Charge of JCLG, followed by the Inaugural Address by Prof. (Dr.) Harpreet Kaur, Vice-Chancellor, and the Keynote Speech by Mr. Akshay Jaitly, Founding Partner, Trilegal. Distinguished guests including Dr. Garima Dadhich, Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Mr. Aayush Kumar, Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, and Prof. (Dr.) Shilohu Rao graced the occasion, while Prof. (Dr.) Kondaiah Jonnalagadda joined online.
The Editors-in-Chief of JCLG then presented their vision for the Summit, emphasizing its role as an academic platform to engage, question, and contribute to the evolving field of corporate and commercial law. They expressed gratitude to Trilegal and SCC Online-SCC Times for their continued support and knowledge partnership.
In his address, Dr. Manoj Kumar Singh highlighted the significance of the collaboration between JCLG and Trilegal, describing the Summit as a celebration of intellectual engagement and exploration. He noted JCLG’s role in fostering discussions on contemporary themes, from algorithmic trading to sustainable finance, and thanked Trilegal for bridging the gap between academia and industry. He extended his gratitude to all the guests, and the JCLG editorial and volunteer teams for their efforts, expressing hope that the discussions would inspire meaningful contributions to corporate law and governance.
Prof. (Dr.) Harpreet Kaur, in her address, discussed emerging trends such as AI-driven contracts, automation, predictive analysis, and ethical challenges linked to smart contracts and intellectual property. Citing Bartz v. Anthropic PBC (June 2025, California), she elaborated on generative AI risk management. She also spoke on ESG considerations, digital integration of SMEs and MSMEs, and India’s DPDP Act, 2023, emphasizing the importance of aligning corporate purpose with societal and legal objectives.
Delivering the Keynote Address, Mr. Akshay Jaitly reflected on the evolving role of corporate lawyers, emphasizing the importance of contextual understanding, precision in drafting, and sectoral specialization. He discussed the balance between legal possibility and commercial reality, using franchising in India as an example, and highlighted how AI continues to reshape the legal landscape. He also advised young professionals to align passion with competence and embrace the rigor of corporate law practice.
The ceremony concluded with Dr. Sunita Pankaj, Registrar, NLU Jodhpur, facilitating the dignitaries, followed by a brief overview of the day’s proceedings.
Panel Discussion 1
Theme: AI, Automation, and Accountability: Reimagining Fiduciary Duties in the Digital Boardroom
Panelists: Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Partner, Trilegal; Mr. Aayush Kumar, Partner, Trilegal; Prof. (Dr.) Shilohu Rao; and Prof. (Dr.) Kondaiah Jonnalagadda
Moderator: Dr. Sarthak Mishra, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National Law University, Jodhpur
The first panel explored the evolving contours of fiduciary responsibility in the era of artificial intelligence and digital governance.
Prof. (Dr.) Kondaiah Jonnalagadda emphasized that directors must exercise independent judgment and integrity in discharging their duties, even as technology reshapes traditional notions of control. He explained that under the Companies Act, 2013, the residence of directors may determine a company’s effective place of management and legal jurisdiction, raising complex issues in cross-border governance. He highlighted the misuse of technology in corporate affairs and the emergence of a “black hole of jurisdiction” arising from digital anonymity. Referring to the Devas Mauritius case (2021), he underscored how foreign-based directors enabled the company to initiate arbitration despite its dissolution, illustrating jurisdictional challenges in transnational corporate structures. He cautioned that while AI may assist in decision-making, business management remains a matter of human judgment, and overreliance on algorithms would be unwise. Future amendments to company law, he observed, may be required to address AI integration and digital accountability.
Prof. (Dr.) Shilohu Rao noted that the integration of AI into corporate governance is both inevitable and transformative. Referring to Albania’s appointment of an “AI Minister,” he discussed how AI’s role in governance reflects both potential and unpredictability. Under Section 166 of the Companies Act, directors are bound by human standards of reasonableness, creating uncertainty when AI assists in decision-making. He envisaged a future where AI might serve as a “board-level assistant” or “Chief AI Officer,” provided it operates ethically, transparently, and free from bias. He advocated for internal audits, algorithmic transparency, and a regulatory “sandbox” approach to test AI tools in controlled environments, balancing innovation with ethical oversight.
Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Partner at Trilegal, examined the challenges of attributing legal liability to AI, given that accountability traditionally attaches to identifiable human actors. While AI can simulate reasoning, it lacks moral consciousness, and thus liability under Section 166 continues to rest with human directors. He highlighted the unpredictability of AI systems trained on vast third-party data and stressed the need for disclosure of AI reliance in board decisions. He proposed a separate regulatory body for algorithmic accountability, noting that regulators like SEBI are beginning to address algorithmic governance. However, he cautioned that excessive regulation could impede innovation, concluding that while AI can aid efficiency and reduce boardroom conflicts, it cannot replace human judgment.
Mr. Aayush Kumar, Partner at Trilegal, emphasized that AI enhances decision-making efficiency but simultaneously heightens directors’ duty of care. He noted that directors must ensure AI systems are trained on accurate, non-sensitive data and that reliance on such systems does not dilute their fiduciary obligations. Rather, AI demands heightened ethical vigilance and collaborative decision-making. He concluded that technology should reinforce and not replace human judgment, fostering transparency and collective responsibility in the digital boardroom.
Panel Discussion 2 –
Theme: ESG, Climate Governance, and Stakeholder Capitalism: Reassessing Corporate Responsibility
Panellists: Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Partner, Trilegal; Mr. Aayush Kumar, Partner, Trilegal; Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, Chief General Manager, SEBI; Prof. (Dr.) Kondaiah Jonnalagadda; and Dr. Garima Dadhich.
Moderator: Dr. Anand Kumar Singh, Assistant Professor, National Law University, Jodhpur
The second panel explored the growing intersection between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles, climate accountability, and corporate responsibility in India’s evolving legal and business landscape.
Prof. (Dr.) Kondaiah Jonnalagadda opened the discussion by noting that the Companies Act, 2013 explicitly integrates principles of social welfare and environmental responsibility, marking a shift from profit-centric corporate objectives to broader societal obligations. He observed that Section 8 companies embody this change, transferring aspects of social responsibility traditionally borne by the State to corporations. Referring to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and reports by Oxfam and the ICJ, he emphasized the urgent need for adequate climate financing and state and corporate accountability under the Paris Agreement. He highlighted India’s proactive stance, including the Supreme Court’s suo motu actions and government notifications reinforcing the duty to protect the environment and combat climate change.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, Chief General Manager at SEBI, reflected on the shifting corporate paradigm from shareholder to stakeholder capitalism. Citing the SEBI Act’s preamble, he noted that protecting investor interests and promoting market integrity are now inseparable from environmental and social considerations. He discussed SEBI’s “climate-plus” approach, emphasizing sustainability disclosures that extend across corporate value chains in line with international standards such as BRSR Core. These frameworks, effective from 2026—27, aim to balance compliance with business viability and have already improved investor confidence and brand value. While many companies are showing early compliance, he cautioned that expanding such obligations to climate accountability remains under deliberation.
Dr. Garima Dadhich addressed the increasing significance of ESG in corporate strategy, observing that climate change and social concerns now represent both business risks and opportunities. She noted that ESG is no longer a matter of reputation but of resilience and competitiveness. Referencing disclosure trends, she highlighted that 82% of companies reported climate-related information in 2023, a 73% increase from the previous year, reflecting growing board-level recognition of sustainability. She recommended elevating board oversight, harmonizing reporting frameworks, leveraging AI and digital infrastructure, and fostering proactive stakeholder engagement. Dr. Dadhich underscored that ESG should be viewed as a tool for long-term value creation, with the National Investment Fund (NIF) and CSR frameworks better aligned with ESG objectives.
Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Partner at Trilegal, shared practical insights on the growing influence of ESG diligence in attracting foreign investment. He observed that foreign investors increasingly require ESG assessments before funding, and companies with strong ESG credentials enjoy a competitive advantage. Citing Tata Group as a pioneer in responsible business practices, he noted that ESG compliance not only enhances reputation but also mitigates legal and financial risks. He cautioned that non-compliance can rapidly escalate into crises amplified by social media scrutiny. While start-ups often deprioritize ESG, he argued that regulatory incentives and stricter lending norms could promote greater adherence across sectors.
Mr. Aayush Kumar, Partner at Trilegal, emphasized that within ESG, the “G” component, governance, often receives inadequate attention. He highlighted governance challenges in family-controlled companies, where board independence may be compromised. The role of independent directors, he noted, is crucial in ensuring objectivity and accountability. He advocated for strengthening their capacity to seek evidentiary data, record dissent, and communicate with regulators to enhance transparency. Reinforcing governance, he concluded, is central to realizing the broader goals of stakeholder capitalism and sustainable corporate conduct.
Day 2: 9th November, 2025
Paper Presentation Panel 1
Presentation 1: Ameeshi Jain & Dilpreet Kaur Hanspal — Greenwashing 2.0: Hindrance in ESG Disclosures and Good Corporate Governance
The presenters examined how AI had transformed traditional greenwashing into a more sophisticated form of deception. They argued that while AI enhanced sustainability reporting, it also enabled algorithmically refined but misleading ESG narratives that weakened transparency. Drawing on frameworks such as the EU’s CSRD, U.S. SEC rules, and India’s BRSR, they identified regulatory and fiduciary gaps allowing AI-driven ESG manipulation. Through case studies involving Adani, Infosys, ITC, Reliance, DWS, and Tyson Foods, they illustrated how algorithms obscured environmental and social risks. The paper introduced the idea of “techno-fiduciary duty,” urging boards to ensure AI literacy, independent validation, and algorithmic oversight, and called for AI audits and accountability measures to preserve ESG integrity.
Presentation 2: Shefali Usha & Vrinda Rajoria — Bridging REITs and Tokens: Can India’s SM-REIT Regime Absorb Real Estate Tokenization Without Breaking Investor Protections?
The presenters analysed how India’s SM-REIT Regulations could integrate real estate tokenization without undermining investor safeguards. They highlighted conflicts between blockchain-based ownership and laws under SEBI, SCRA, and the Depositories Act, especially in issuance, trading, and governance. Drawing on global models from the U.S., EU, and Singapore, they proposed recognizing tokens as securities and using GIFT-IFSC as a regulatory sandbox. The presentation recommended phased legal amendments and controlled experimentation to balance innovation with protection, envisioning India as a leader in regulated tokenized real estate.
Presentation 3: Avni Vashishtha & Tarishi Verma — Fiduciary Duty of the Board in AI Decision-Making
The presenters discussed fiduciary duties of care, loyalty, and oversight amid AI-driven decision-making. They noted that while the Companies Act, SEBI regulations, and the IT Act established broad duties, none addressed AI-specific risks like opacity or bias. Referring to the EU AI Act and UK regulatory models, they proposed mandatory AI impact statements, director liability clauses, independent audits, and AI oversight committees to align governance with duties under Sections 166 and 134. The paper concluded that regulatory reform was needed to balance AI innovation with accountability and shareholder protection.
Presentation 4: Deepanshu & Pratynik Chakraborty — Just Transition Bond or Just a Transition Bond: Rethinking the Indian Transition Bond Framework from European and Japanese Experiences
The presenters assessed India’s transition bond framework, questioning whether it achieved a “Just Transition” or merely funded emissions reduction. Comparing SEBI and IFSCA regulations with EU and Japanese models, they observed the absence of binding social safeguards in India’s approach. They warned against “transition-washing” and urged inclusion of mandatory social-impact disclosures and mitigation measures. The paper recommended aligning India’s framework with Paris Agreement goals to ensure equity and inclusiveness in decarbonisation finance.
Presentation 5: Purwesh Prabhakar Sahare & Janhvi Ashok Dhanvijay — Beyond the Black Box: Proposing a Framework for Algorithmic Due Diligence in Indian Corporate Law
The presenters examined governance gaps arising from opaque AI use in corporate decision-making. They proposed an “Algorithmic Due Diligence” framework comprising board-level technical expertise, independent algorithmic audits, and enhanced AI-related disclosures. Drawing on the EU AI Act and UK/US models, they advocated for digital-literate directors, third-party conformity assessments, and transparent reporting to strengthen oversight and investor confidence.
Presentation 6: Vedansh Raj — Climate Disclosures under BRSR Core 2025: From Formalism to Fiduciary Accountability in Indian Corporate Governance
The presenter evaluated the BRSR Core 2025 framework, arguing that despite mandatory disclosures, it risked remaining a formal compliance exercise. Comparing India’s approach with the EU, U.S., and Australia, the study urged reinterpretation of directors’ duties to include climate accountability under Section 166, treating misstatements as securities violations. It recommended expanding coverage to major emitters and mandating board-level climate oversight to embed fiduciary responsibility in sustainability governance.
Presentation 7: Kanhaiya Kumar & Vaishnavi Singh — Tokenised Carbon Credits in India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme: Settlement Efficiency, Integrity, and Regulatory Feasibility
The presenters analysed India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme under the Energy Conservation Amendment Act, 2022, identifying challenges such as delayed settlements, double counting, and weak traceability. They proposed blockchain-based tokenisation for transparency and real-time settlement. Highlighting legal ambiguities under the SCRA and IT Act, they recommended on-chain validation, regulated custody, and inter-regulatory coordination. Drawing from global models, they suggested leveraging India’s digital infrastructure for a credible, inclusive carbon market.
Presentation 8: Trishya Kumar & Zoya Sethi — Legislating Integrity: Safeguarding Whistleblowers of India
The presenters reviewed India’s whistleblower protection regime, noting fragmentation across the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, Companies Act, and SEBI (LODR) Regulations. They highlighted deficiencies such as lack of anonymity, weak enforcement, and burdensome proof requirements. Comparing with the UK’s Public Interest Disclosure Act, they urged comprehensive reform with statutory oversight, anti-retaliation mechanisms, and robust enforcement to strengthen ethical governance and investor trust.
Paper Presentation Panel 2
Presentation 1: Chirkankshit Bulani & Alok Krishna — Prominence Foreclosure and Design Neutrality: Assessing Google’s Above-the-Fold Self-Preferencing under India’s Competition Act
The presenters examined Google’s self-preferencing through “above-the-fold” prominence, arguing that such design practices restricted market access and consumer choice under Section 4 of the Competition Act. Drawing from the EU DMA and U.S. antitrust cases, they proposed a “Design Neutrality Toolkit” with parity slots, ad-density caps, and transparency norms, alongside a flexible soft-law framework to balance regulation and innovation.
Presentation 2: Siddharth Sengupta — Downstream Investments by AIFs: Regulatory Challenges in Managerial Control and the Way Forward
The presenter discussed challenges faced by AIFs under the FEMA (NDI) Rules, 2019, particularly regarding FOCC status, veto rights, and SPV investments. The study recommended RBI clarifications, amendments to Schedule VIII, and adoption of a manager-based registration model aligned with global standards to enhance regulatory certainty and investor confidence.
Presentation 3: Anusha Roy & Deeksha Pandey — From CSR to ESG: Closing Loopholes That Enable Greenwashing and Regulatory Arbitrage in India
The presenters traced India’s shift from CSR to ESG, highlighting superficial compliance and fragmented regulation among SEBI, MCA, and RBI. Citing global models, they advocated a unified ESG law with third-party assurance, parent-subsidiary liability, and phased implementation to prevent greenwashing and promote measurable sustainability outcomes.
Presentation 4: Vatsal Dwivedi — High-Frequency and Algorithmic Trading in India: Redefining UPSI and Insider Trading Enforcement under SEBI
The presenter analysed how AI-driven trading challenged SEBI’s insider trading framework, which presumes human intent. They identified gaps in defining UPSI and assigning liability, proposing AI surveillance, expanded definitions, and vicarious liability models to enhance enforcement and market integrity.
Presentation 5: Aman Goyal & Manoswita Hazra — Scaling Board-Level Environmental Governance: Mandating Environmental Directors in India’s Top 500 Corporations
The presenters argued for statutory environmental directors under Section 149 of the Companies Act to institutionalise ESG accountability. They proposed phased implementation, beginning with top listed entities, supported by regulatory enforcement and capacity-building to embed sustainability within governance structures.
Presentation 6: Sejal &Vishrut Veerendra —A Tale of Three Regulators: The Jhunjhunwala Case and the Divergence of Insider Trading Law in India, the US, and the UK
The presenter analysed insider-trading allegations arising from Rekha Jhunjhunwala’s 2025 divestment from Nazara Technologies, comparing India’s SEBI regime with U.S. and U.K. standards. Identifying enforcement challenges in tracing leaks and distinguishing political intelligence, the study proposed AI-based surveillance and clearer statutory rules to enhance traceability and deterrence.
Valedictory Ceremony
The valedictory ceremony commenced with a warm welcome by the speaker, who expressed heartfelt gratitude to all participants, judges, and members of the audience for their enthusiastic participation and contributions throughout the event.
Mr. Vaibhav Kothari, Partner at Trilegal, extended his appreciation to the University and the Journal for organizing the summit. He remarked that the objective of the summit was to bridge the gap between academic inquiry and practical implementation, providing a vibrant platform for the exchange of diverse perspectives. Mr. Kothari observed that such initiatives enrich both scholarship and practice by bringing together regulatory, governmental, and industry insights. He commended the participants for presenting innovative and thought-provoking research and lauded the organizers for their professionalism and hospitality. Concluding his address, he conveyed Trilegal’s appreciation for the opportunity to collaborate with NLU Jodhpur and expressed the firm’s hope to continue this partnership in future editions of the summit.
Following this, Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor, Prof. (Dr.) Harpreet Kaur, addressed the gathering. She extended her gratitude to the chief guests, participants, organizers, and staff for their collective efforts in making the summit a success. Dr. Kaur applauded the high quality of research presented, observing that many papers addressed timely and widely debated issues in corporate law and governance. She encouraged participants to continue exploring the context and evolution of their chosen themes. Emphasizing the importance of sustainability as a foundational legal and ethical principle, she likened it to the constitutional values of liberty, equality, and justice, and advocated for its deeper integration into contemporary legal discourse. Dr. Kaur also underscored the need for sustained collaboration between academia, industry, and students, acknowledging Trilegal’s continued support and commending the dedication of the Journal team, volunteers, faculty, and staff.
The Editors-in-Chief, Ms. Dwija Rajan and Ms. Akrati Trivedi, highlighted the summit’s role in fostering academic excellence, critical engagement, and meaningful collaboration. They extended heartfelt thanks to the judges, participants, Trilegal, faculty members, and the University administration for their unwavering support and contribution to the event’s success.
The award ceremony followed, with the Registrar and Dr. Manoj Kumar felicitating the Second Runners-Up, Chirkankshit Bulani and Alok Krishna from Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law. The First Runners-Up, Avni Vashishtha and Tarishi Verma from Symbiosis Law School, Noida, were felicitated by Prof. (Dr.) Harpreet Kaur and Mr. Vaibhav Kothari. The Winners of the competition were announced as Shefali Usha and Vrinda Rajoria from Jindal Global Law School.
It was further announced that the top six papers from the competition will be published, with details to be shared in due course.
The ceremony concluded with the distribution of certificates of merit to all participants and a reaffirmation of the collective commitment to continue these meaningful conversations beyond the summit—fostering ongoing learning, research, and reform in the field of corporate law and governance.