The Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) on Wednesday issued a resolution expressing its opposition to the proposal for an increase in the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district courts from ₹2 crores to ₹20 crores. 

The committee will consist of the members of the executive committee of the DHCBA as well as Senior Advocates AS Chandhiok and Arvind Nigam. It will formulate a plan of action for opposing the proposal.

DHCBA has also called for inputs from its members.

Notably, on January 27, DHCBA President N Hariharan, Vice President Sacchin Puri, Secretary Vikram Singh Panwar, Senior Advocates AS Chandhiok, Arvind Nigam and Rakesh Tiku had met the High Court judges committee to discuss the issue. 

Speaking to Bar & Bench, DHCBA Vice President Sacchin Puri said that the Bar raised serious opposition to the proposal. 

The Coordination Committee of the All District Courts Bar Association of Delhi had in May 2025 had written to the Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal and members of Law Commission requesting to raise the demand for the enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts from ₹2 crores to ₹20 crores. 

A committee of the five Delhi High Court judges has been constituted to consider the issue and to interact with the stakeholders and make recommendations.

The judges' committee consists of Justices V Kameswar Rao, Nitin Wasudeo Sambre, Vivek Chaudhary, Prathiba M Singh and Navin Chawla.

Notably, on January 24, 2026, the Registrar General of the High Court wrote to the Coordination Committee of the All District Courts Bar Association, inviting a few representatives to participate in a meeting with the judges’ committee. That meeting is scheduled to be held today on January 30.

Meanwhile, the Coordination Committee of All District Bar Association passed a resolution yesterday opposing the DHCBA resolution, asking it to withdraw or modify its resolution.

“The Coordination Committee, at the very outset, strongly condemns the aforesaid Resolution of the DHCBA as being wholly unjustified, ill-founded, regressive, and contrary to the larger public interest, litigant interest, and the constitutional objective of ensuring timely, affordable, and accessible justice,” the Coordination Committee said in its resolution.

It further stated that the existing pecuniary jurisdiction of ₹2 crores has become “grossly unrealistic and economically obsolete” owing to rise in property rates.

Increasing of pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts would ease High Court’s burden of pending cases, the resolution said.

The Committee has requested members to express their views on the issue through a Google form provided in the resolution.

[Read DHCBA resolution]

[Read Coordination Committee’s resolution]

[Read Delhi High Court letter to Coordination Committee]

[Read Coordination Committee’s letter to Law Minister]