NEWSLETTERFebruary 2019

The e-commerce sector in India has grown Your inputs and feedback are always

exponentially in a relatively short span of welcome and we look forward to our

time to become an industry worth billions, as interactions with you.

on date. The Government issued press note

2 of 2018 recently that revised, and issued

clarifications on, the foreign direct

investment policy in the e-commerce sector.

The article analyses the effect of the changes

in the FDI Policy brought in by the recent

press note 2 of 2018 in light of the already

existing and established e-commerce

practices in India..

We continue to highlight certain key

judgements passed by the Hon'ble Court as

well as changes in Corporate and

Commercial laws.

This edition brings to our readers a featured article titled ”Clarifications on

FDI in E-Commerce Sector - The Predicament of Marketplace Entities in

India”.

“Clasis Law’s Managing Partner Vineet Aneja has

been included in IBLJ’s A-List of the top 100 lawyers for

the year 2018 and recognised as amongst India’s

Most Trusted Corporate Lawyers by

ICCA, 2017”

Contents

Clarifications on FDI in E-Commerce Sector - The Predicament of Marketplace Entities in India Page 2

Legal AlertsPage 5

Corporate and CommercialPage 6

Recent EventsPage 8

OffbeatPage 9

Welcome to the February Edition of the Clasis Law Newsletter

Ranked amongst the TOP 40 Indian Law Firm, by RSG Consulting Rankings 2017

1

(ii) Marketplace based Model - wherein the entity only

provides an information technology platform on

digital or electronic network to act as a facilitator

between the buyer and the seller.

It is pertinent to note that the FDI under automatic route

in the e-commerce sector is permitted so long as the

entity operates through the marketplace based model

and not inventory based model. The entity undertaking

e-commerce activities must enter into transactions with

sellers on a business to business (“B2B”) basis only.

Ownership and control over inventory - Press

Note 2016 prohibited an entity offering a marketplace

to exercise ownership over the inventory. It further

provided that such ownership of the inventory will

render the business into inventory based model.

Additionally, in terms of Press Note 2016, an e-

commerce entity was not permitted to allow more than

25% of the sales on its marketplace through one

vendor or its group companies. Press Note 2018, takes

it a step further, by disallowing an e-commerce entity

from exercising ownership or control over any

inventory that is to be sold on such entity's platform as

that will convert the business from market place model

to the inventory model. The Press Note provides that

inventory of seller will be deemed to be controlled by

the e-commerce marketplace entity if more than 25%

of purchases of such seller are from the marketplace

entity or its group companies. The term 'Group

company' is defined in the FDI Policy as “two or more

enterprises which directly or indirectly, are in a position

to exercise 26% or more of voting rights in other

enterprise; or appoint more than 50% of members of

board of directors in other enterprise”.

Prohibition on equity participation - The DIPP has

inserted a new restriction through Press Note 2018

which expressly prohibits an entity having equity

participation by an e-commerce marketplace entity or

its group companies, or having control on its inventory

by e-commerce marketplace entity or its group

companies, from selling its products on the platform

run by such marketplace entity. Therefore, all seller

entities that are using the platform for selling their

goods and services would not be allowed to sell on the

platform if the e-commerce entity or its group

companies hold equity or have control on the inventory

of such a seller entity. This insertion appears to have a

The e-commerce sector in India has grown

exponentially in a relatively short span of time to

become an industry worth billions, as on date. It is

undeniable that the e-commerce sector is one of the

fastest growing ones and continues to lure both

strategic and financial foreign investors from across the

globe. In fact, the recent acquisition of Flipkart by Wal-

Mart has been touted as world's biggest e-commerce

deal and goes to prove the lure that the Indian e-

commerce market has globally.

In this business milieu when online commerce is

successfully taking over market share bit by bit from

brick and mortar stores, the Department of Industrial

Policy and Promotion (“DIPP”) issued press note 2 of

2018 dated December 26, 2018 (“Press Note

2018”) wherein it revised, and issued clarifications on,

the foreign direct investment policy (“FDI Policy”) in

the e-commerce sector. The e-commerce sector was

earlier regulated by press note 3 of 2016 dated March

29, 2016 (“Press Note 2016”), incorporated in the

FDI policy of 2017, which now stands superseded by

the Press Note 2018. The provisions of Press Note 2018

have come into effect recently, from February 1, 2019.

Despite recommendations from stakeholders to extend

the deadline for implementation of Press Note 2018,

the DIPP issued a press release to implement the

revised e-commerce policy from February 1, 2019.

This article seeks to analyse the effect of the proposed

changes in the FDI Policy by the Press Note 2018 in light

of the already existing and established e-commerce

practices.

Foreign investment is permitted up to 100% through the

automatic route in the e-commerce sector. In terms of

Press Note 2016 and Press Note 2018 e-commerce is

defined as buying and selling of goods and services

(including digital products) over digital and electronic

network. The Press Note 2018, as is the case with Press

Note 2016, recognizes the following two categories of

business models:

(i) Inventory based Model - wherein, any inventory of

goods and services is owned by the e-commerce

entity and thus sold directly to the consumer.

A. Drawing parallels between Press Note 2016

and Press Note 2018.

2

Clarifications on FDI in E-Commerce Sector - The Predicament of

Marketplace Entities in India

The synergy of Walmart Flipkart alliance and its impact on the Indian retail sector

The synergy of Walmart Flipkart alliance and its impact on the Indian retail sector

3

deeper impact on the U.S. giants operating in India

such as Amazon and Flipkart (which is owned by

Walmart) as they are known to be functioning through

selected sellers in whom they have equity participation.

Therefore, as per news reports, post Press Note 2018,

Amazon India has restructured its business model by

offloading the equity held by it in its vendor Cloudtail

(which was earlier a part of Amazon group) so as to

comply with the Press Note 2018.

Services provided by Entity - The Press Note 2016

allowed marketplace entities to provide support

services including warehousing, logistics, payment

collection, order fulfilment, call centre and other

services to sellers on their platform. However, an e-

commerce marketplace entity was prevented from,

directly or indirectly, influencing the sale price of the

concerned goods and services being sold on its

platform. In terms of Press Note 2018, an e-commerce

marketplace entity shall continue to ensure that it does

not, directly or indirectly, influence the sale price of

goods and services and maintain a level playing field at

all times. Therefore, services by the e-commerce

marketplace entity or its group company to sellers

where they have direct or indirect equity participation

or common control shall be provided at arm's length

basis. For the purpose of this provision all sellers on the

platform have to be placed equally and provided or

offered to be provided services by the e-commerce

marketplace entity in a manner which is not unfair or

discriminatory. This provision in Press Note 2018

clarifies that the provision of services to any vendor on

such terms which are not made available to other

vendors in similar circumstances will be deemed unfair

and discriminatory. This might result in lesser discounts

and cashbacks which are offered by the sellers.

In short, e-commerce entities are required to provide

the same suite of services or facilities to all sellers under

"similar circumstances". While the stated objective of

enabling a level playing field is laudable, this

requirement will be difficult to comply with. The

interpretation of the term "similar circumstances"

remains to be seen.

Interestingly, the Press Note 2018 appears to recognize

an existing practice of providing 'cash-backs' to

customers as long as they are fair and non-

discriminatory.

B. New insertions in Press Note 2018.

C. Predicament of Entities

Exclusivity - Among the new conditions introduced by

Press Note 2018, it is expressly provided that the e-

commerce marketplace entity shall not mandate any

seller to sell their products exclusively on a single entity's

platform alone. However, while many are interpreting

this as an end to exclusivity arrangements between

brands and the e-commerce entity to sell on the platform

exclusively, it is pertinent to note that the provision only

limits the entity from mandating any seller to sell

exclusively on the platform. Therefore, if a seller so

desires, it can choose to partner exclusively with any one

entity. However, the seller may also have to ensure that it

is making sales through their own website and other

brick and mortar stores. As a result of this condition the

e-commerce marketplace entities would need to revisit

the contractual arrangements with their exclusive sellers

and amend such contracts to comply.

Filing requirements - Unlike before, every entity is

now required to submit a compliance certificate and a

report of statutory auditors to the Reserve Bank of India

to certify their compliance with the guidelines and

requirements laid down in the Press Note 2018 by

September 30, every year, for the preceding year.

The Press Note 2018 has created quite a stir in the e-

commerce sector and the board rooms of major entities

occupying a large market share in this sphere. The

clarifications introduced by the Press Note 2018 have

brought about a tectonic change in the manner of doing

business by the e-commerce marketplace entities. The e-

commerce marketplace entities have to re-evaluate their

business models and make changes to comply with the

Press Note 2018. We have tried to hereinafter discuss a

few issues that are coming to light in terms of the

provisions of Press Note 2018:

(i) Entities like Flipkart and Amazon India control a

sizable chunk of their inventory, via local vendors.

This policy puts restrictions on such tactics by

capping the inventory that vendors purchase from

their group/ parent companies. It may be noted that

there is a cap of 25% on sellers who buy products

from Amazon or Flipkart's wholesale companies this

means that sellers will now have to source 75% of

their products from other sources, which is likely to

Comment

For any clarification or further information,

please contact

The bringing about of Press Note 2018 could seemingly

affect the retail sector by levelling the online competition

significantly and creating an equal opportunity for

homegrown e-commerce businesses and brick and

mortar stores. Though the Press Note 2018 has been a

pacifier for the Indian trading community, it would be

intriguing to see how the Press Note 2018 would be

enforced by the Government and if it would in any way

affect the e-commerce policy which is being pondered

over by the Government of India.

Priyanka AnandAssociate PartnerE: priyanka.anand@clasislaw.com

Sudipto MitraAssociateE: sudipto.mitra@clasislaw.com

4

increase their cost and it might become difficult for such

sellers to offer discounts in the future.

(ii) The clarification issued by DIPP on Press Note 2018

dated January 3, 2019 states that the current policy

does not restrict the nature of products that can be sold

on an e-commerce marketplace which would include

private labels however, it is currently unclear if this

means that private labels owned by e-commerce

entities can also be sold on their marketplaces.

(iii) The Press Note requires that an "e-commerce

marketplace entity will not mandate any seller to sell

any product exclusively on its platform only". This

restriction is expected to adversely impact exclusive

arrangements between e-commerce marketplaces and

telecom or white goods manufacturing companies, to

sell products exclusively on their online platforms (e.g.

OnePlus sells its popular smartphones only via Amazon

India and not any other marketplace).

(iv) There is no guidance on how enforcing authorities

would determine if a seller has been "mandated" to sell

its products exclusively on an e-commerce platform, or

if the seller is choosing to do so voluntarily. For instance,

some brands with limited sales in India have made a

conscious decision to have an online presence only, to

be able to better control costs and reduce logistical

challenges around a pan-India offline distribution

network. For them, it might make business sense to tie-

up with one e-commerce platform.

(v) Entities like Flipkart and Amazon India functioned by

purchasing branded goods in bulk from the

manufacturers at reduced prices and sell them on their

platform through their selected sellers at discounted

prices, often offering cash-backs. However, now these

selected sellers would not be allowed to sell on the

entity's platform owing to the restriction on equity

participation.

The Appellant Corporation challenged the order of the

High Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The

Appellant strongly relied on the Judgment of the Apex

Court in Employees State Insurance Corporation vs.

Apex Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (1998) 1 SCC 86 wherein the

Board of Directors elected one of its Directors as the

Managing Director of the Company and were granting

him remuneration of Rs. 12,000/- for rendering

services as Managing Director and it was held that the

Managing Director is an employee. The Hon'ble

Supreme Court, while dealing with the present case,

observed that in Apex Engineering (supra), the question

was, whether the Managing Director was an

“employee” within the meaning of Section 2 (9) of the

ESI Act, and the Supreme Court had held that the

Managing Director is an employee.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court considering its earlier

judgment in Apex Engineering (supra) and facts in

present case came to the conclusion that the High

Court overlooked the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in Apex Engineering (supra) and relied heavily on

the decisions of the Bombay High Court which have

been overruled by the decision of Apex Engineering

(supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court consequently held

that the High Court was incorrect in assuming that the

Director of a Company, who had been receiving

remuneration for discharge of duties assigned to him,

may not fall within the definition of an employee for the

purposes of the ESI Act. It was further held that there

was no reason to interfere with the decision of the

appellant in holding the Respondent liable to make

payment towards contribution in relation to the

remuneration paid to the Directors.

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Appellant was

allowed and the order passed by the High Court was

set aside.

Legal Alerts

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment

dated February 5, 2019 passed in Employee's State

Insurance Corporation vs Venus Alloy Pvt. Ltd.

SLP (Civil) No. 12812/ 2015 has held that the

Directors of a company, who are receiving

remuneration will fall within the purview of “employee”

under Section 2 (9) of the Employees State Insurance

Act 1948 (“ESI Act”).

The Respondent i.e., Venus Allay Pvt. Ltd., in the present

case, was covered under ESI Act and had been

depositing the amount of contribution with reference to

the wages paid to some of its employees. On inspection

by the Appellant i.e., Employees State Insurance

Corporation (“the Corporation”), it was found that

the Respondent had not made any contributions in

respect of the remuneration paid to the Directors.

The Deputy Director of the Appellant, vide order dated

April 6, 2005 called upon the Respondent to make

payment of contribution in relation to the remuneration

paid to the Directors. The Respondent challenged the

said order by way of an application under section 75 of

the ESI Act before the Employees State Insurance Court

(“ESI Court”).

The ESI Court after considering the facts of the case at

hand took a view that neither the amount received by

the directors fall under the category of pay nor the

Directors do not fall under the category of the

employees as envisaged under Section 2(9) of the ESI

Act, and accordingly vide its order dated December 24,

2005 declared the order of the Appellant void and

unfair.

Thereafter, the Appellant preferred an appeal under

Section 82 of the ESI Act before the High Court of

Madhya Pradesh, challenging the order of the ESI

Court. The High Court after relying on certain

precedents of the Bombay High Court dismissed the

appeal of the Appellant thereby upholding the order of

the ESI Court. The High Court concluded that the

Directors do not come within the purview of the

“employees”, as defined under Section 2(9) of the ESI

Act.

5

Hon'ble Supreme Court determines the question on whether the Directors of a Company, receiving

remuneration fall within the purview of “employee” under the Employees State Insurance Act 1948

USD 50 million in a financial year. Further, for ECBs

which are raised from a foreign equity holder and

utilised for working capital purposes, general

corporate purposes or repayment of rupee loans,

the MAMP shall be 5 years.

5. Permissible amount: All eligible borrowers can now

raise up to USD 750 million of ECB through the

automatic route in a financial year. However, earlier

limits of USD 10 billion and USD 3 million continue

to apply for public sector oil market companies and

start-ups, respectively.

6. Late submission fee: Whereas reporting

requirements for ECBs largely remain the same, the

Revised Circular has introduced a late submission

fee for delay in reporting drawdown of ECB proceeds.

7. 'Untraceable Entities': The Revised Circular sets out

standard operating procedure for 'untraceable

entities' which have raised ECB. Once an entity has

been designated as an untraceable entity, the

outstanding amount will be treated as written-off

from external debt liability of the country but may be

retained by the lender in its books for recovery

through judicial/non-judicial means.

8. ECB under insolvency/restructuring process: The

Revised Circular sets out that any entity which is

under restructuring scheme or going through

corporate insolvency may raise ECB only if

specifically permitted under the resolution plan.

9. Refinancing of existing ECBs: Designated authorised

dealer category I banks are permitted to refinance

any prevailing ECB by raising fresh ECBs provided

that (i) outstanding maturity of the original

borrowing or the weighted outstanding maturity in

case of multiple borrowings is not reduced, and (ii)

all-in-cost of the fresh ECB is lower than the all-in-

cost of the existing ECB or the weighted average cost

in case of multiple borrowings. Further, refinancing

of ECBs raised under the erstwhile ECB framework

may also be permitted subject to the authorised

dealer bank ensuring that the borrower is eligible to

raise ECB under the Revised Circular. The Revised

Circular also permits raising of fresh ECBs to part

refinance existing ECB subject to the provisions of the

Revised Circular.

Corporate and Commercial

RBI revises ECB framework

On January 16, 2019, the RBI issued a circular (Revised

Circular) pursuant to which it revised the framework

relating to external commercial borrowings (ECBs). The

Revised Circular sets out that the new norms that have

been introduced to rationalise the regulations relating to

ECBs with the objective of making it easier to raise foreign

debt.

The key revisions that have been introduced by the Revised

Circular are set out below:

1. Reclassification and merging of tracks: Prior to the

Revised Circular, the ECB framework comprised of

three tracks namely (i) Track I (medium term foreign

currency denominated ECB with minimum average

maturity of 3/5 years); (ii) Track II (long term foreign

currency denominated ECB with minimum average

maturity of 10 years); and (iii) Track III (Indian Rupee

(INR) denominated ECB with minimum average

maturity of 3/5 years). These tracks have now been

reclassified as follows:

(a) Tracks I and II have been merged under 'foreign

currency denominated ECB', and

(b)Track III has been merged with rupee

denominated bonds and classified as 'Rupee

denominated ECB' (INR ECB).

2. Expansion of 'Eligible Borrowers': The erstwhile ECB

framework categorised eligible borrowers based on

each track. However, the Revised Circular simply

provides that all entities eligible to receive foreign

direct investment are eligible borrowers.

3. Revision of recognised lenders: The Revised Circular

sets out that any person which/who is a resident of a

country (a) which is a member of the Financial Action

Task Force (FATF), or (b) whose securities market

regulator is a signatory to the International

Organization of Securities Commission's Multilateral

Memorandum of Understanding, would qualify as a

'recognised lender'.

4. Minimum Average Maturity Period (MAMP): The

Revised Circular sets out a standardised MAMP for all

ECBs, which is 3 years. However, there are exceptions

to this, for example, a manufacturing sector entity

may raise ECB with MAMP of 1 year for ECB up to

6

Ministry of Labour and Employment notifies filing

of Unified Annual Returns, effective 29th January,

2019

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India

amends the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of

India (Insolvency Resolution Process for

Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016

On 29th January, 2019, the Ministry of Labour and

Employment, notified amendments to the following five

major labour enactments, in order to do away with the

cumbersome process of physical filing of annual returns :

1. Payment of Wages(Mines) Amendment Rules, 2019

2. Payment of Bonus(Amendment Rules), 2019

3. Industrial Disputes (Central) Amendment Rules, 2019

4. Maternity Benefit (Mines and Circus) Amendment Rules,

2019

5. Minimum Wages (Central) Amendment Rules, 2019

An employer is now required to file a unified annual return

in a format as prescribed under the respective labour

enactments, online on the web portal of the Ministry of

Labour and Employment. The date for filing the unified

annual return will be on or before the 1st day of February

in each year.

On January 24, 2019, the IBBI amended the Insolvency

and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution

Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 provides for

corporate insolvency resolution process for invitation,

receipt, and consideration of resolution plans; and

approval of a resolution plan to resolve insolvency of the

corporate debtor. It envisages that a resolution plan, once

approved, must be implemented. In furtherance of this,

the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has notified

the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency

Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (Amendment)

Regulations, 2019 today to discourage persons, other

than genuine, capable and credible resolution applicants,

to submit resolution plan. The amendment mandates that

the request for resolution plans shall require the resolution

applicant, in case its resolution plan is approved by the

committee of creditors, to provide a performance security.

Performance security means security of such nature, value,

duration and source, as may be approved by the

committee of creditors, having regard to the nature of

resolution plan and business of the corporate debtor. The

Resolution Professional shall attach the evidence of

receipt of performance security while submitting the

resolution plan to the Adjudicating Authority for approval.

Such performance security shall be forfeited if the

resolution applicant of such plan, after its approval by the

adjudicating authority, fails to implement or contributes to

the failure of implementation of the plan. The amendment

also requires that the resolution plan shall include a

statement as to whether the resolution applicant or any of

its related parties has failed to implement or contributed to

the failure of implementation of any resolution plan

approved by the Adjudicating Authority under the

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 at any time in the

past. The amendment enables a creditor, who is

aggrieved by non-implementation of a resolution plan

approved by the Adjudicating Authority, to apply to the

Adjudicating Authority for appropriate direction.

On January 31, 2019, the RBI issued a press release, to

launch the Ombudsman Scheme for Digital Transactions,

2019 (”Scheme”) for redressal of complaints against

System Participants as defined in the said Scheme. The

Scheme, launched under Section 18 of the Payment and

Settlement Systems Act, 2007, will provide a cost-free and

expeditious complaint redressal mechanism relating to

deficiency in customer services in digital transactions

conducted through non-bank entities regulated by RBI.

Complaints relating to digital transactions conducted

through banks will continue to be handled under the

Banking Ombudsman Scheme. The offices of

Ombudsman for digital transactions will function from the

existing 21 offices of the Banking Ombudsman and will

handle complaints of customers from their respective

territorial jurisdiction. The Scheme provides for an

appellate mechanism under which the complainant /

system participant has the option to appeal against the

decision of the Ombudsman before the Appellate

Authority. The Scheme shall come into force from January

31, 2019.

On January 31, 2019, SEBI issued a circular on

“Reporting for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine

Learning (ML) applications and systems offered and used

by Market Infrastructure Institutions (MIIs)”. This reporting

requirement seeks to create an inventory of information

regarding AI/ ML landscape in financial markets to help in

in-depth understanding of the adoption of technology in

financial markets; this may help in any AI/ ML related

potential policy making that may arise in future. As per this

circular, all market infrastructure institutions shall file AI/

ML reporting form as prescribed in this circular in respect

of AI/ ML based applications or systems and submit it with

SEBI on quarterly basis with effect from the quarter ending

on March 31, 2019.

Ombudsman Scheme for Digital Transactions

DIPP issues press release to state for non-

extension of deadline for updated e-commerce

rules

7

Lawserv, The Legal Sevices Expo

14th February 2019, Mumbai

Clasis Law partnered with IDEX Legal for the LawServ “The Legal Services Expo” event on February 14, 2019, at the St. Regis

Hotel in Mumbai.

The agenda of the Lawserv event was to connect the growing plethora of innovative solution & product providers, compliance

management system providers and Law firms with buyers of legal services, i.e. directors, legal heads and the internal

management of companies and start-ups operating in varied sectors across India.

Clasis Law was represented by Mr. Vineet Aneja, Managing Partner, Mr. Mustafa Motiwala, Partner, Ms. Priyanka Anand,

Associate Partner and Mr. Kanav Rawat, Associate. The expo was well attended and the team had the opportunity to interact

with many members of the legal and HR fraternity. Through such interactions the team gained valuable connections and

constructive insights with regards to the real-world requirements and other business challenges that impact such buyers of

legal services in today's competitive market.

In addition to the Legal expo, the day-long event boasted of a unique Theater session whereby, a diverse panel of speakers

shared their perspectives and key takeaways on the current legal ecosystem in India.

As part of the theater session, Clasis Law conducted an interactive session on the subject of 'Prevention of Sexual Harassment at

work'. The session was conducted by Mr. Vineet Aneja, Managing Partner and Ms. Priyanka Anand, Associate Partner from the

Clasis Law. The hour long session was very well received by the attendees and the speakers were approached by many in-

house counsels, directors and HR representatives to discuss the practical difficulties faced by them viz-a-viz the POSH Act and

challenges of handling complaints in an effective manner.

Recent Events

8

Roadshow on Competetion Law

15th October 2018, Pune

Barasha Baruah Pathak, Associate Partner attended a

conference titled, Roadshow on Competetion Law held

at Hotel Trident, Nariman Point, Mumbai on 15th

October, 2018. The key focus of the conference was to

engage the stakeholders in informative and practical

discussion pertaining to cartels and leniency, merger

controls and various topics of competition law. The

conference was attended by the officials of

Competition Commission of India, Indian Institution of

Corporate Affairs, practicing lawyers and officials of

banks and corporates. The highly informative speeches

and panel discussions threw light on the significant

aspects of competition law.

37th National Conference - "NATCON 2018

28-29 September 2018, Pune

The National Institute of Personnel Management (Pune

Chapter) hosted its 37th National Conference -

"NATCON 2018" on 28th & 29th September 2018, at

Hotel Westin, Pune. The conference was well attended

by the HR fraternity, including delegates from all over

India and overseas. The conference was attended by

Mr. Gaurav Wahie, Partner and Ms. Priyanka Anand,

Associate Partner from Clasis Law. The theme of the

conference was 'managing future of work and

workplace' and had renowned national and

international speakers sharing their views on current

challenges to effective workplace, exploring the impact

of technology on workplace and means to develop a

performance driven culture.

Roadshow on Competetion Law

15th October 2018, Pune

Barasha Baruah Pathak, Associate Partner attended a

conference titled, Roadshow on Competetion Law held

at Hotel Trident, Nariman Point, Mumbai on 15th

October, 2018. The key focus of the conference was to

engage the stakeholders in informative and practical

discussion pertaining to cartels and leniency, merger

controls and various topics of competition law. The

conference was attended by the officials of

Competition Commission of India, Indian Institution of

Corporate Affairs, practicing lawyers and officials of

banks and corporates. The highly informative speeches

and panel discussions threw light on the significant

aspects of competition law.

37th National Conference - "NATCON 2018

28-29 September 2018, Pune

The National Institute of Personnel Management (Pune

Chapter) hosted its 37th National Conference -

"NATCON 2018" on 28th & 29th September 2018, at

Hotel Westin, Pune. The conference was well attended

by the HR fraternity, including delegates from all over

India and overseas. The conference was attended by

Mr. Gaurav Wahie, Partner and Ms. Priyanka Anand,

Associate Partner from Clasis Law. The theme of the

conference was 'managing future of work and

workplace' and had renowned national and

international speakers sharing their views on current

challenges to effective workplace, exploring the impact

of technology on workplace and means to develop a

performance driven culture.

Be Positive

To kick start my New Year: I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Be Positive

To kick start my New Year: I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Offbeat

A digital detox refers to a state when an individual quits or suspends use of digital equipment and devices to utilize that time for social interactions and activities. It is a technique that enables an individual to relieve stress and anxiety incurred from being over occupied by a high utilization of digital devices.

What is Digital Detox

Digital Detox

Different Ways to Digital Detox in the Office

� No-Tech MeetingsRather than heading into meetings with laptops and tablets in hand, why not take the step of making some meetings technology-free?

� Organise Workplace Mindful ActivitiesThe lunch break is one time of the day workers often spend glued to social media feeds or online news outlets. But after spending most of the morning in front of tech, it makes sense to give employees a break. Organising lunchtime activities such as a running club, yoga or even a group lunch can help to boost well being and productivity.

� Set up Digital Detox Buddy systemYou might find it easier if you have someone else to bounce digital detox ideas off, sharing what has and hasn't worked for them.

� Adopt a Tech-Free WindowCreate an hour-long window on a weekly or even daily basis, where your whole company switches off from technology and focuses on their individual tasks. This might work better if you stick to non-essential tech, such as email and instant messaging.While this can help employees to focus without unnecessary distraction, it can also stimulate face-to-face conversation among your teams.

9

Need of Digital Detox

Known as “The Festival of Lights,” Diwali is an ancient Hindu festival celebrated in Autumn as determined by the Hindu Lunisolar calendar. The festival signifies the victory of light over darkness, good over evil.

1. To improve and boost your relation with family and friends.2. To enhance your productivity.3. It allows you to get better sleep.4. It reduces the stress in life as you are just focusing on yourself.5. It helps in improving your eye sight.6. It reduces the problem of obesity as people will once again

enjoy being outdoors along with is activities.

Wherever we are, the virtual world is close by. With smartphones, laptops, tablets, and wireless Internet, we're able to stay plugged in all the time. That's why the idea of a digital detox has become increasingly popular.

Our Offices

New Delhi14th FloorDr. Gopal Das Bhawan28, Barakhamba RoadNew Delhi 110 001T: +91 11 4213 0000F: +91 11 4213 0099

Mumbai1st Floor, Bajaj Bhawan226, Nariman PointMumbai 400 021T: +91 22 49100000F: +91 22 49100099

info@clasislaw.com www.clasislaw.com

DISCLAIMER: This publication is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in

the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to herein. Readers should take legal

advice before applying the information contained in this publication to specific issues or

transactions.

NEW DELHI | MUMBAI