The Delhi High Court has imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on counsel for the decree holder after the lawyer appeared in a virtual hearing from a moving car. Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that such an appearance affected courtroom decorum and was contrary to the Delhi High Court’s applicable video-conferencing rules.
Background
The order arose in connected enforcement proceedings concerning South Indian Bank Ltd and Union Bank of India Ltd, through South Indian Bank Ltd as lenders’ representative, against the National Highways Authority of India. The matters were OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 92/2026 and 93/2026.
During the hearing, counsel Nachiketa Goyal appeared from a moving car. The Court noted that although virtual hearings offer convenience, that convenience cannot interfere with the proper conduct of judicial proceedings.
The Court observed,
"While this Court appreciates the convenience offered by virtual hearings, such convenience cannot come at the cost of the decorum of the Court or cause disturbance in the conduct of judicial proceedings."
Justice Shukla also referred to the Electronic Evidence and Video Conferencing Rules, 2025, which require advocates to endeavour not to join proceedings from vehicles except in exceptional circumstances and with the Court’s permission. The Court found that no such exceptional circumstances existed in this case.
The Court also noted that stamp duty on the arbitral award dated November 13, 2024, had been paid on December 24, 2025, beyond the prescribed period. Counsel submitted that the stamp duty and penalty had subsequently been deposited before the Collector and undertook to submit proof.
The Delhi High Court imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on the counsel for the decree holder, directing payment to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within one week.
The matters were directed to be listed on October 15, 2026.
