Delhi High Court Bar Association resolved to abstain from work on Monday in protest against the Delhi High Court’s move on increasing district courts’ pecuniary jurisdiction from Rs.2 crore to Rs.20 crore, citing major impact on litigation structure and lawyers.
The executive committee of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) resolved to abstain from work on Monday as a protest against the Delhi High Court for taking cognisance of a proposal to increase the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts from Rs.2 crore to Rs.20 crore.
Pecuniary jurisdiction, in this context, is the monetary threshold up to which a civil court can entertain disputes. The trial court lawyers had similarly abstained from work on Thursday in support of the same demand.
The proposal traces its origin to a letter written by the coordination committee of the All District Courts Bar Association to the Union Ministry of Law on May 23, 2025, seeking an enhancement in the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts.
After this, the Delhi High Court, at its full court meeting on September 2, 2025, decided to form a committee to consult stakeholders, examine the issue in a comprehensive manner, and submit recommendations.
A six-judge committee was then constituted, comprising Justices V. Kameswar Rao, N. W. Sambre, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Vivek Chaudhary, Prathiba M. Singh, and Navin Chawla.
In its letter issued on Friday, the DHCBA urged that any further proceedings before the committee be kept in abeyance. The association argued that the full court took cognisance of the May 23, 2025 communication even though it was addressed to the Union Ministry and not to the Delhi High Court.
The DHCBA contended that the Union Ministry had neither sought the High Court’s views nor initiated any process regarding the issue, yet the full court proceeded to examine the request. It further maintained that any change in pecuniary jurisdiction is exclusively a matter for the legislative domain and that a proposal in this regard must originate from the ministry.
The association also claimed that the High Court lacked the jurisdiction to initiate such a move, and that even the formation of the committee to deliberate on the issue was beyond its authority.
The DHCBA further requested that it be given an opportunity to place its concerns before the full court.
In a separate letter issued on Thursday, it had asked for all relevant documents including the agenda notes circulated to the full court, any recommendations made by the Chief Justice on the matter, and copies of the full court resolutions constituting the committee and defining its mandate to be placed before the full court for consideration.