2026 Daksha Legal Kar 57-66. Suit for specific performance. A person who asserts an independent title to the subject property through a registered instrument is a 'proper party' under Order I Rule 10(2) of the CPC. Although such a person may not be a party to the underlying agreement to sell, their impleadment is essential to ensure a complete and effective adjudication of the dispute and to avoid the risk of conflicting judicial findings or a multiplicity of subsequent litigations regarding the same property. Karnataka High Court.
2026 Daksha Legal Kar 57-66. Suit for specific performance. A person who asserts an independent title to the subject property through a registered instrument is a 'proper party' under Order I Rule 10(2) of the CPC. Although such a person may not be a party to the underlying agreement to sell, their impleadment is essential to ensure a complete and effective adjudication of the dispute and to avoid the risk of conflicting judicial findings or a multiplicity of subsequent litigations regarding the same property. Karnataka High Court.
  • 20-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. Suit for partition. A plaint claiming relief in excess of what may be ultimately decreed is not rendered barred by law. Plaint cannot be rejected on this ground. Supreme Court
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. Suit for partition. A plaint claiming relief in excess of what may be ultimately decreed is not rendered barred by law. Plaint cannot be rejected on this ground. Supreme Court
  • 19-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Pre-emptive suit by testator for avoiding disputes regarding execution and proof of Will.
Pre-emptive suit by testator for avoiding disputes regarding execution and proof of Will.
  • 21-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Article
News
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. ‘Interlocutory res judicata.’ A party which has once succeeded or failed on an issue cannot re-agitate the same at a subsequent stage of the same proceedings. Supreme Court.
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. ‘Interlocutory res judicata.’ A party which has once succeeded or failed on an issue cannot re-agitate the same at a subsequent stage of the same proceedings. Supreme Court.
  • 19-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. Hindu Succession Act. Section 6(5) A plea of oral partition based solely on oral evidence must be rejected outright and only in exceptional cases, where such a plea is supported by public documents and is evinced in the same manner as a partition effected by a court decree, may it be entertained. Supreme Court.
2026 Daksha Legal SC 75-92. Hindu Succession Act. Section 6(5) A plea of oral partition based solely on oral evidence must be rejected outright and only in exceptional cases, where such a plea is supported by public documents and is evinced in the same manner as a partition effected by a court decree, may it be entertained. Supreme Court.
  • 20-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal SC 66-74. Order XX Rule 18 CPC. A successful party need not initiate independent, fresh final decree proceedings. The Trial Court is mandated to suo motu keep the suit pending and immediately take consequential steps to partition the property by metes and bounds, or order a judicial sale if it is physically impartible. Supreme Court.
2026 Daksha Legal SC 66-74. Order XX Rule 18 CPC. A successful party need not initiate independent, fresh final decree proceedings. The Trial Court is mandated to suo motu keep the suit pending and immediately take consequential steps to partition the property by metes and bounds, or order a judicial sale if it is physically impartible. Supreme Court.
  • 20-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal Kar 32-56. High Court will not exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to grant interim bail solely on the grounds of ‘mercy’ or ‘humanitarian sympathy’ if the arrest proceedings do not depict a blatant non-application of mind or illegality. The proper remedy for such relief lies with the regular bail court. Karnataka High Court.
2026 Daksha Legal Kar 32-56. High Court will not exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to grant interim bail solely on the grounds of ‘mercy’ or ‘humanitarian sympathy’ if the arrest proceedings do not depict a blatant non-application of mind or illegality. The proper remedy for such relief lies with the regular bail court. Karnataka High Court.
  • 19-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal SC 50-65. In a suit for specific performance, the vendor has to be impleaded as a party in the appeal and on his death, on non-substitution of his heirs /legal representatives, the appeal would abate. Supreme Court.
2026 Daksha Legal SC 50-65. In a suit for specific performance, the vendor has to be impleaded as a party in the appeal and on his death, on non-substitution of his heirs /legal representatives, the appeal would abate. Supreme Court.
  • 18-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
2026 Daksha Legal Kar 25-31. Bigamy. Section 494 IPC. Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of an offence of bigamy based on a police report filed under Section 190(1)(b). A police report cannot be elevated to the status of a ‘complaint’ for offences falling under Chapter XX of the IPC. Karnataka High Court.
2026 Daksha Legal Kar 25-31. Bigamy. Section 494 IPC. Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of an offence of bigamy based on a police report filed under Section 190(1)(b). A police report cannot be elevated to the status of a ‘complaint’ for offences falling under Chapter XX of the IPC. Karnataka High Court.
  • 18-May-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement

Become A Member Get Instant Update

Daksha Legal Seminars

Daksha Legal Seminar on Model Tenancy Act

  • 03-October-2021 22:43

Panchanama - Evidentiary Value: Justice John Michael Cunha, Former Judge Karnataka High Court

  • 15-July-2021 03:42

Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code

  • 15-July-2021 03:40

Judgment on Basic Structure doctrine- Kenya High Court

  • 15-July-2021 03:37

Trial of Suits for Declaration of Title, Injunction and Possession. S.R.Somashekar, Principal District Judge (Rtd)

  • 30-May-2021 17:55

Trial of Partition Suits :Procedural Law (Part-I) Shri. S.R. Somashekara, Principal District Judge (Rtd) 28 May 2021

  • 30-May-2021 04:27

Discussion on Junior Advocates and guidance by Seniors.

  • 09-December-2020 06:19

Bail & Anticipatory Bail - M.S. Shyamsunder, Advocate, Bangalore

  • 09-December-2020 06:20

Woman as Coparcener. Legal Implications - Justice N Kumar

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Anup Shah

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Instruments Not Duly Stamped - Justice A N Venugopalagowda

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Withdrawal and Adjustment of Suits - Justice A N Venugopalagowda

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Judicial Review jurisdiction Prayers and Reliefs Mr Mohan V Katarki Senior Advocate Supreme Court

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Rejection of Plaint Justice A N Venugopalagowda 16 Sept 2020

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Driving License and Defence to Insurer - Mr S P Shankar Senior Advocate

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Termination of Contract & Drafting Termination Clause & Termination Notice - Ajay Nandalike. Adv.

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Daksha Legal Seminar Justice Ashok B Hinchigeri. "Civil Procedure Code. Order 26 Rule 9"

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Daksha Legal Online seminar on disability laws with Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate, Bangalore.

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Article 370 - Bridge or Barricade? Seminar conducted by Daksha Legal - Mr. J Sai Deepak, Advocate

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Daksha Legal discussion on Latest Judgement of Karnataka High Court on Hindu Law.

  • 25-November-2020 06:11

Client Reviews

Client Review 1
Client Review 2
Client Review 3
Client Review 4
'Supreme Court curtailing the inherent powers of the High Courts. Neither Legal nor Justified'. - B.V.Acharya, former Advocate General for Karnataka.
'Supreme Court curtailing the inherent powers of the High Courts. Neither Legal nor Justified'. - B.V.Acharya, former Advocate General for Karnataka.
  • 07-November-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Tender. When the intending party responds to the tender notice, it is not permissible for such party to put forth its own conditions and seek variance in the conditions of tender. Karnataka High Court.
Tender. When the intending party responds to the tender notice, it is not permissible for such party to put forth its own conditions and seek variance in the conditions of tender. Karnataka High Court.
  • 08-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Suit for specific performance. Purchaser of suit property from the defendant/vendor is a necessary party to the suit and can be impleaded. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Purchaser of suit property from the defendant/vendor is a necessary party to the suit and can be impleaded. Karnataka High Court.
  • 03-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Suit for specific performance. Plaintiff can seek amendment of pleading to declare that collusive decree between his vendor and third party is not binding on him. Court must prevent multiplicity of the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Plaintiff can seek amendment of pleading to declare that collusive decree between his vendor and third party is not binding on him. Court must prevent multiplicity of the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
  • 01-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Tender. Courts cannot interfere with the terms of the tender because it feels that some other terms would have been fair, wiser or logical. Karnataka High Court.
Tender. Courts cannot interfere with the terms of the tender because it feels that some other terms would have been fair, wiser or logical. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-September-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued towards refund of advance sale consideration upon the failure to execute the sale deed, attracts the provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued towards refund of advance sale consideration upon the failure to execute the sale deed, attracts the provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
  • 28-September-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article