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.
Cheque Cases: 20% Interim Compensation – Advocate Manish Jha
Calcutta High Court upholds a direction to pay Rs 10 lakh interim compensation under Section 143A NI Act on a Rs 50 lakh cheque, and confines recovery to the statutory route.
Read → 14 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateSC: Zero Period Relief Where Access Failed – Advocate Manish Jha
Supreme Court upholds Zero Period Policy benefits to a developer where NOIDA never provided the promised 45-metre access road — beneficial policies get purposive construction.
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 → 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 · Commercial & CorporateJudgment Without Trial: Order XIII-A Summary Judgment in Commercial Suits
Commercial courts can decree claims without oral evidence where a party has no real prospect of success and no compelling reason for trial exists. The test, the pre-issues window, conditional orders and the tactics on both sides.
Read → 13 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateThe Price of Paying Late: Statutory Interest on MSME Dues Under Sections 15–17 MSMED Act
Forty-five days is the outer payment limit whatever the contract says; beyond it runs compound interest with monthly rests at three times the RBI bank rate, non-deductible for tax and protected by the Act's overriding effect.
Read → 12 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporatePersonal Guarantee, Composite Transaction: SC Restores Guarantor to Arbitration
In NSDC v. Surya Wires (2026 INSC 977), the Supreme Court held that guarantees executed as pre-disbursement conditions form one composite transaction with the loan agreement, binding the guarantor to its arbitration clause via Section 7(5).
Read → 12 September 2026 · Commercial & CorporateSufficient Interest, Public Interest: Third-Party Impleadment Before the CCI Upheld
A Delhi High Court Division Bench dismissed UltraTech's LPA, holding that Regulation 25 permits parties with sufficient interest — like the Builders' Association of India — to join cartel proceedings in furtherance of public interest.
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.