These notes are written for litigants and for younger members of the Bar. They explain procedure as it operates in the Delhi courts — the sequence of steps, the timelines that matter, and the points at which a matter is commonly lost. They are general information, not advice on any particular case.
SC Restores Convictions of Two Acquitted – Advocate Manish Jha
Supreme Court partly reverses a High Court acquittal in an unlawful assembly murder case, restoring two convictions while upholding a Section 319-added accused's acquittal.
Read → 14 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateExcepted Matters Are for the Arbitrator – Advocate Manish Jha
Supreme Court clarifies that whether a dispute falls within a contract's excepted matters is for the arbitral tribunal under Section 16, not the referral court.
Read → 14 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateS.11: Arbitrator Named Despite Silence – Advocate Manish Jha
Where a respondent ignores the arbitration notice, the court supplies the appointment: a September 2026 Section 11 order on a joint-nomination clause, explained.
Read → 14 September 2026 · Civil & PropertyEviction: Alternative Premises Plea Fails – Advocate Manish Jha
Delhi High Court upholds denial of leave to defend in a bona fide requirement eviction — bare pleas of alternative accommodation raise no triable issue.
Read → 14 September 2026 · Criminal LawCharge Framing Needs No Mini-Trial: PMLA – Advocate Manish Jha
Jharkhand High Court upholds PMLA charge framing: grave suspicion suffices, detailed reasons are for discharge orders, and defence evaluation belongs to trial.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Criminal LawIntent, Not Fabric: How the Supreme Court Buried the “Skin-to-Skin” Reading of POCSO
Attorney General for India v. Satish (2021) rejected the Bombay High Court's skin-to-skin reading of Section 7 POCSO: contact through clothing is physical contact, and sexual intent — not the mechanics of touch — defines the offence.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Civil & PropertyDecades of Occupation, No Title: The Supreme Court on Adverse Possession and Religious Dedication
In Bhag Singh v. Basant Kaur (2026 INSC 983), the Supreme Court held that long possession without affirmatively proved hostile animus cannot ripen into adverse possession, revenue entries do not confer title, and religious dedication demands unequivocal proof.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateRegistered Too Late: Delhi High Court Holds MSMED Benefits Do Not Reach Pre-Registration Supplies
In Shri Krishan Grit Co. v. Continental Engineering Corporation, the Delhi High Court upheld an arbitrator's Section 16 ruling: 2016–17 supplies could not ride on a 2019 MSME registration, and an abandoned earlier arbitration barred re-litigation.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateThe Council Sits in Kolkata, the Courts Sit in Delhi: Section 29A Meets an Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause
The Calcutta High Court dismissed a Section 29A extension petition in a WBMSEFC arbitration: the statutory reference overrides contractual procedure, but the contract's exclusive jurisdiction clause still decides which court supervises.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateThe Clock Stops for Talking: Delhi High Court Excludes Mediation Time in a Section 11 Petition
In Flemingo (DFS) v. Airports Authority of India, the Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator, holding limitation ran from the 2021 rejection of claims — not the first grievance — and excluding 147 days of mediation from the computation.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateWhen the Conviction Falls, the Deposit Goes Back: Delhi High Court on Section 148(3) NI Act
The Delhi High Court held a cheque-bounce complainant must refund the 20% appellate deposit once the accused stands acquitted — Section 148(3) creates a mandatory repayment obligation, whichever court issues the direction.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Civil & PropertyClaiming the Roof Costs the Shelter: Second Appeal on Tenancy Repudiation Fails in the Delhi High Court
In Mohd. Mahboob v. Arshi Qureshi (RSA 126/2026), the Delhi High Court held a tenant who stopped paying rent and claimed ownership repudiated his tenancy, forfeiting the lease under Section 111(g) TPA and facing eviction as an unauthorised occupant.
Read →What Is Covered Here
The chamber writes on the areas in which it appears: criminal procedure under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, bail practice, matrimonial and family proceedings before the Delhi Family Courts, cheque dishonour and recovery, and proceedings before the NCLT and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals. Notes on reported judgments of the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Delhi are published with a link to the official text of the decision, so that a reader can verify the position rather than rely on a summary.
No article on this page identifies a client or discusses a pending matter conducted by the chamber. Where a statutory provision is cited, the section number is given so that a reader can verify it against the bare Act.