When a plaintiff pleads a later date of knowledge regarding fraud or denial of rights in a suit for cancellation of a deed, limitation under Article 59 of the Limitation Act becomes a mixed question of law and fact, and the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Delhi High Court.
When a plaintiff pleads a later date of knowledge regarding fraud or denial of rights in a suit for cancellation of a deed, limitation under Article 59 of the Limitation Act becomes a mixed question of law and fact, and the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Delhi High Court.
  • 03-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
SARFAESI Act. The mandatory requirement of pre-deposit contemplated under the second proviso to Section 18(1) applies only to a borrower. A non-borrower cannot be compelled to make any pre-deposit as a condition precedent for maintainability of the appeal. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 193-210
SARFAESI Act. The mandatory requirement of pre-deposit contemplated under the second proviso to Section 18(1) applies only to a borrower. A non-borrower cannot be compelled to make any pre-deposit as a condition precedent for maintainability of the appeal. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 193-210
  • 04-June-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
Partnership Act. At the stage of registration of a partnership firm, the District Registrar cannot embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the partnership, its internal arrangements, or any alleged procedural irregularities in its past affairs except verifying fulfilment of statutory requirements. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal 187-192
Partnership Act. At the stage of registration of a partnership firm, the District Registrar cannot embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the partnership, its internal arrangements, or any alleged procedural irregularities in its past affairs except verifying fulfilment of statutory requirements. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal 187-192
  • 04-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
SARFAESI Act. Bar under Section 34 does not apply where a plaintiff alleges that a mortgage was created through fraud or that the title documents held by the bank are forged,. When a suit is filed for a declaration of title and a challenge is made to the validity of the mortgage on the grounds of fraud, plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 173-186
SARFAESI Act. Bar under Section 34 does not apply where a plaintiff alleges that a mortgage was created through fraud or that the title documents held by the bank are forged,. When a suit is filed for a declaration of title and a challenge is made to the validity of the mortgage on the grounds of fraud, plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 173-186
  • 02-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
In international child custody disputes, jurisdiction is determined by the child’s ordinary residence. Where the child has been substantially raised abroad, Indian courts, guided by comity of nations and the child’s best interests, ordinarily decline merits adjudication and direct return to the country of habitual residence for custody determination. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 151-172
In international child custody disputes, jurisdiction is determined by the child’s ordinary residence. Where the child has been substantially raised abroad, Indian courts, guided by comity of nations and the child’s best interests, ordinarily decline merits adjudication and direct return to the country of habitual residence for custody determination. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 151-172
  • 02-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Group of Companies Doctrine. A non-signatory company cannot be dragged into arbitration merely because it belongs to the same corporate group and assisted in contract administration unless there is a common intention to be bound by the arbitration agreement. Bombay High Court.
Group of Companies Doctrine. A non-signatory company cannot be dragged into arbitration merely because it belongs to the same corporate group and assisted in contract administration unless there is a common intention to be bound by the arbitration agreement. Bombay High Court.
  • 02-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Group of Companies. Arbitration agreement entered into by a Company within a group of companies binds non-signatory affiliates if the circumstances are such as to demonstrate the mutual intention of the parties to bind both signatories and non-signatories. Supreme Court.
Group of Companies. Arbitration agreement entered into by a Company within a group of companies binds non-signatory affiliates if the circumstances are such as to demonstrate the mutual intention of the parties to bind both signatories and non-signatories. Supreme Court.
  • 02-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Suit for possession. When plea of adverse possession fails, question of limitation to institute the suit cannot be pleaded/raised against the plaintiff. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for possession. When plea of adverse possession fails, question of limitation to institute the suit cannot be pleaded/raised against the plaintiff. Karnataka High Court.
  • 02-June-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