Aman Avinav

Aman Avinav is a Partner based in the Delhi office of Phoenix Legal, with over sixteen years' experience in advisory, dispute resolution, internal investigations and white-collar crimes. His primary practice area is Arbitration and Mediation.

He represents clients across sectors before courts in India, including the Supreme Court, various High Courts and trial courts, on a range of issues. He has extensive experience representing clients before judicial and quasi-judicial forums including the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the PMLA Appellate Tribunal, DRT, NCDRC, NCLT, NCLAT, TDSAT and other appellate and ancillary forums. He also regularly advises and represents clients in both ad hoc and institutional arbitrations, as well as in related court proceedings, including applications for interim relief, appointment of arbitrators, and the enforcement and challenge of arbitral awards.

He also defends clients against criminal proceedings launched by the State Police, ED, EOW and SFIO, and has successfully represented them at different stages of investigation and prosecution. His areas of practice include arbitration, commercial litigation, internal investigations and white-collar crime.

His arbitration experience includes representing an OTT aggregator platform in an arbitration against a broadcaster arising out of an agreement for content distribution; representing a Swiss trading firm in a challenge under section 34 of the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to an award rendered by the ICC; representing a UK-based footwear and apparel company in a petition under Section 34 challenging an arbitral award passed by the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA); and representing one of the largest global multi-brand retail chains in a petition under Section 34 against an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.

He represented one of the petitioners in the batch of petitions culminating in the landmark constitution bench judgment of the Supreme Court in Bharat Aluminium Co. vs. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Service Inc., (2012) 9 SCC 552 (BALCO Case). He has also acted on behalf of an infrastructure joint venture company against NHPC Ltd. in a Section 34 petition arising out of a contract for setting up a Hydro Electric Power Project in Himachal Pradesh, and represented a waste management company in several arbitration claims seeking recovery of money from municipal bodies.

His commercial and regulatory litigation experience includes successfully representing a partnership firm engaged in real estate renting business in an appeal before the Delhi High Court; representing one of the largest fast-food restaurant chains in India before the Delhi High Court in a writ petition against an attachment order issued by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation; and acting for an operational creditor against one of the world's largest health, hygiene and nutrition brands under Sections 8 & 9 of the Indian Bankruptcy Code, 2016. He has handled and supervised the pan-India litigation docket of one of the largest European banks as a retainer assignment and assisted in their banking licence handover process.

He has defended a London-based banking corporation in a recovery suit filed for money lost as a result of hacking, cyber fraud and phishing before the Delhi District Court; represented a European bank before the Supreme Court in a special leave petition arising out of a PIL seeking inquiry into the loan operations of banking companies; and represented various telecom companies before the Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court and the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) in disputes including intra-circle roaming arrangements for 3G and Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR).

His internal investigation and white-collar crime experience includes successfully representing one of the directors of an online news media company before the Delhi High Court in a quashing petition against an investigation by the Economic Offences Wing and the Directorate of Enforcement; successfully representing a wholly owned subsidiary of a REIT in an income tax prosecution under sections 276-B and 278B of the Income Tax Act; and representing a major cryptocurrency trading platform in appellate proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal under the PMLA, challenging a confirmation order passed by the Adjudicating Authority in relation to provisional attachment proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement under Section 5 of the PMLA.

He has also represented a subsidiary of a major German sports giant before the Punjab & Haryana High Court and Gurgaon District and Sessions Court in relation to a Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) investigation and the complaint subsequently filed by the SFIO; represented a Fortune 500 company in an investigation before the Directorate of Enforcement for unauthorised repatriation of funds; and conducted internal investigations and forensic audits for Indian subsidiaries of international sports performance, automobile, pharmaceutical and automation companies.