•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA)

29 January 2018

A Bar Council of India (BCI) sub committee consisting of Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) president Kirti Uppal and seven others opposed the Law Commission's recommendation that bar council elections should be replaced by nomination and called it an attempt similar to measures taken during India's 1975 constitutional emergency, reported Live Law.

25 January 2018

NDTV.com reported:

Delhi High Court Advocates Protesting Attack Over Colleagues Abstain From Work

The executive committee of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) on Wednesday passed a resolution condemning t

24 March 2017

Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra wrote to the Law Commission yesterday, withdrawing the BCI resolution that had recommended a ban on lawyer strikes and heavy fines for professional misconduct, after possibly up to 4,000 lawyers marched to the BCI office demanding Mishra’s resignation.

22 November 2016

Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) president Kirti Uppal, who defeated incumbent president Rajiv Khosla in this year’s DHCBA polls by almost 300 votes, said his vote bank was comprised mostly of first generation lawyers with a practicing experience of five to seven years.

19 November 2016

Kirti Uppal has defeated incumbent Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) president Rajiv Khosla by nearly 300 votes in yesterday’s elections.

31 May 2016

The Delhi high court today implemented the 'one bar one vote' principle across all the courts in national capital, which means an advocate in Delhi can vote only once in one bar association, regardless of his or her multiple bar association memberships.

01 April 2016

Senior advocates are now temporarily outside the service tax net, as the Delhi high court today stayed the imposition of this tax on them, reported Mint.

Justices S Muralidhar and RK Gauba ordered the stay on the Delhi High Court Bar Association’s (DHCBA) plea that charging senior advocates on the services they provide to their clients, as well as charging the clients on the services they take from senior advocates, amounts to double taxation and is unconstitutional.

The stay order was passed in order to maintain consistency with a similar stay order by the Guajarat high court on 30 March, according to Mint.

The DHCBA had also contended that the function of senior advocates – aiding the court in administration of justice – is not a “taxable service”, according to Live Law which published a copy of the DHCBA’s petition in the Delhi high court.

The union budget 2016 had withdrawn the exemption provided to senior advocates from service tax, effectively increasing the cost of instructing them by 14 per cent, as reported by [legallyindia.com/news/budget-catches-senior-advocates-tribunals-with-wider-service-tax-net

Legally India*].

The budget provisions which had taken away the senior advocates’ exemption were to be effective from today. Previous unsuccessful attempts of the government to levy service tax on lawyers came in 2011 and 2012.

06 October 2015

pripqjnoOn certain days, the Indian litigant knows better than to hold the courts to their official calendar of working days: at least 100 days have already been lost this year across various Indian courts to strikes by advocates.

11 September 2015

As Common Cause vs Abhijat & Others came up before Justices Kurian Joseph and Arun Mishra at court No.13 on Friday (September 11) morning, Justice Arun Mishra tried to persuade Prashant Bhushan, counsel for Common Cause, not to go ahead with the contempt petition, as it would not serve any purpose. Justice Mishra said the onus is on the bar, which has to control the striking lawyers. “You have to discipline yourself”, he told Bhushan.

05 August 2015

Bar wars: A hope for peace or is a triple-trilogy just beginning?The Lok Sabha, on day 11 of the monsoon session, passed the Delhi High Court Amendment Bill, 2014 after years of wrangling and lobbying around the issue between the bar of the district court and the high courts in Delhi. The legislation increases the pecuniary jurisdiction of the High Court of Delhi from Rs 20 lakh (Rs 2m) to Rs 2 crores (Rs 20m).

27 July 2015

Does a time of peace and prosperity lie ahead for the bar?Things promised to return to normal in the Delhi high court on Monday after high-stakes drama last week, when the members of DHCBA received message through the newly formed SMS handle DHCBAS declaring that the strike was suspended.

24 July 2015

One of the few sequels better than the originalOne day after members of the Delhi High Court Bar Association received text messages that its president Rajiv Khosla had been suspended for alleged “anti–bar activity”, members were left confused when they received messages today that the DHCBA secretary Abhijat was suspended.

14 May 2015

The Delhi high court Bar Association on Wednesday called off its strike protesting the clearance of bill by the Rajya Sabha to increase pecuniary jurisdiction of the high court as parliament adjourned before it could be passed by the Lok Sabha.

26 March 2015

Hot on the heels of the government getting ready to create special fast-track commercial divisions of all high courts, Delhi high court chief justice G Rohini has decided to redesignate four benches of the Delhi high court to exclusively handle commercial disputes, of which around 20,000 are currently pending.

“According to information released by the office of the Registrar General, Delhi high court, two benches hearing matters of Original jurisdiction, and two division benches, as Commercial Appellate courts, will start functioning from Thursday,” reported the Indian Express.

“Two of these will be e-courts and will function as paperless courts. Sitting judges with the appropriate experience and expertise have already been appointed,” reported The Hindu].

According to the Express, DHCBA secretary Abhijat said it was “alarming that the decision was taken without consulting the Bar” and said that it was a “prima facie meaningless order” since the issue of jurisdiction was to be finalised by the Parliament. “The decision is at best an administrative order which can’t override or supplant a bill which is still being drafted,” he said.

18 March 2015

Rajiv Khosla (l.) and Abhijat Bal (r.)This week in Mint, Legally India dove into the complicated and fascinating politics of the Delhi bar.

05 March 2015

The Rajya Sabha yesterday deferred passing the bill to increase the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Delhi high court, with some members saying that the reform should be clubbed with pending legislation to create commercial divisions in high courts (the Commercial Division of High Courts Bill 2009), with law minister DV Sadananda Gowda conceding to the demands, reported the PTI.

Two politicians by the JD(U) and the BJP made the suggestion, which Gowda seemed happy to accept according to the report.

The commercial divisions bill is currently being redrafted in line with law commission recommendations that have been taken up by the government in the budget.

A series of strikes for and against the bill by bar associations have plagued Delhi, with high court lawyers most recently striking in December 2014, giving six reasons that they are against the measure, which would move matters with a value of less than below Rs 2 crore from the Delhi high court to the district court.

Update: The Rajya Sabha debates stated the following:

 

03 March 2015

Lalit BhasinLegally India investigates in Mint how special interests have succeeded at and could end up indefinitely stalling reform of legal services, despite the government's best laid intentions.

Latest comments