On July 17, Delhi High Court advocates ended a three‑day work abstention that began on July 14, after intensive talks with Union Law Minister Arjun Meghwal and Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya. The protest centered on a proposal to raise the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts from the current ₹2 crore to ₹20 crore—a move many lawyers argue would jeopardise their practice, livelihood, and professional interests.

Background Context

Pecuniary jurisdiction defines the maximum monetary value of cases a court can adjudicate. Presently, the Delhi High Court handles civil and commercial disputes exceeding ₹2 crore, while district courts are limited to cases up to ₹2 crore. The Coordination Committee of All District Court Bar Associations of Delhi has long advocated for expanding this ceiling to ₹20 crore, aiming to offload the high court’s docket and empower lower courts.

Legislative Angle

The full bench of the High Court expressed support for the enhancement, yet the bar association argued that only Parliament can amend the pecuniary limit, as it requires changes to the Delhi High Court Act. On July 10, a division bench dismissed a petition seeking a stay on the “Pecuniary Jurisdiction Report,” underscoring that the legislative route remains essential for any alteration.

Implications and Outlook

Should the proposal be enacted, the High Court could see a reduction of up to 70 % in its case load, potentially easing backlog and improving efficiency. Conversely, many lawyers fear a loss of high‑court practice opportunities, which could affect their earnings and professional growth. While the bar’s resolution emphasized that “the cause will, however, continue unabated,” the recent dialogue with the minister suggests a possible roadmap toward a negotiated settlement.

In the aftermath, the Delhi High Court Bar Association thanked its members for cooperation and reaffirmed its commitment to monitor the issue closely, signalling that the debate over jurisdictional limits is far from settled.