Employee’s Compensation Act. The liability of an insurance company under the Act is strictly governed by the terms of the insurance contract. When a policy is issued based on a specific declaration of wages and a specific category of risk, the insurer’s liability to indemnify the employer is limited to those declared values. Karnataka High Court.
Employee’s Compensation Act. The liability of an insurance company under the Act is strictly governed by the terms of the insurance contract. When a policy is issued based on a specific declaration of wages and a specific category of risk, the insurer’s liability to indemnify the employer is limited to those declared values. Karnataka High Court.
  • 16-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Foreigners Act. Issuance of a ‘Leave India Notice’ during the subsistence of a visa does not amount to an impermissible indirect cancellation of the visa. It is a lawful, independent exercise of the power under Section 3(2)(c) which overrides the permission granted by the visa. Karnataka High Court.
Foreigners Act. Issuance of a ‘Leave India Notice’ during the subsistence of a visa does not amount to an impermissible indirect cancellation of the visa. It is a lawful, independent exercise of the power under Section 3(2)(c) which overrides the permission granted by the visa. Karnataka High Court.
  • 16-February-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
Motor Vehicles Act. A claimant has the right to elect only one of two available forums either the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal or the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. 'Doctrine of Election' bars the dual pursuit of remedies for the same cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. A claimant has the right to elect only one of two available forums either the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal or the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. 'Doctrine of Election' bars the dual pursuit of remedies for the same cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
  • 16-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Section 231(2) Cr.P.C. Where multiple witnesses are set to testify on the same set of facts, and a reasonable apprehension of 'tutoring' or 'overlapping testimony' is raised by the defense, the Trial Court is legally bound to defer the cross-examination of key witnesses until the examination-in-chief of other related witnesses is completed. Failure to do so constitutes a manifest error of jurisdiction that undermines the fairness of the trial. Karnataka High Court.
Section 231(2) Cr.P.C. Where multiple witnesses are set to testify on the same set of facts, and a reasonable apprehension of 'tutoring' or 'overlapping testimony' is raised by the defense, the Trial Court is legally bound to defer the cross-examination of key witnesses until the examination-in-chief of other related witnesses is completed. Failure to do so constitutes a manifest error of jurisdiction that undermines the fairness of the trial. Karnataka High Court.
  • 16-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Constitution of India. A petition under Article 227 is not maintainable against an order of a Civil Court refusing to grant ex-parte injunction when a specific statutory remedy is available under Order XLIII, Rule 1 (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure. High Courts must refrain from exercising their power of superintendence in such cases as a matter of judicial discipline. Karnataka High Court.
Constitution of India. A petition under Article 227 is not maintainable against an order of a Civil Court refusing to grant ex-parte injunction when a specific statutory remedy is available under Order XLIII, Rule 1 (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure. High Courts must refrain from exercising their power of superintendence in such cases as a matter of judicial discipline. Karnataka High Court.
  • 16-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A secured creditor cannot claim immunity from criminal investigation solely on the ground that the loan was advanced against pledged property. Where the accused had no lawful title to the gold, the pledge so created cannot defeat the rights of the true owner, nor can it impede or restrict a lawful criminal investigation under Section 94 of the BNSS. Karnataka High Court.
A secured creditor cannot claim immunity from criminal investigation solely on the ground that the loan was advanced against pledged property. Where the accused had no lawful title to the gold, the pledge so created cannot defeat the rights of the true owner, nor can it impede or restrict a lawful criminal investigation under Section 94 of the BNSS. Karnataka High Court.
  • 14-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Land acquisition. Act 2013 does not expressly or impliedly exclude the application of the Limitation Act. The power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act remains available for appeals preferred under the 2013 Act. Any land acquisition award passed after the commencement of the 2013 Act must be challenged via the appellate route provided under Section 74, and High Courts must exercise a pragmatic, non-pedantic discretion in condoning delays to safeguard the constitutional and statutory rights of the parties involved. Supreme Court.
Land acquisition. Act 2013 does not expressly or impliedly exclude the application of the Limitation Act. The power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act remains available for appeals preferred under the 2013 Act. Any land acquisition award passed after the commencement of the 2013 Act must be challenged via the appellate route provided under Section 74, and High Courts must exercise a pragmatic, non-pedantic discretion in condoning delays to safeguard the constitutional and statutory rights of the parties involved. Supreme Court.
  • 14-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
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.
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.
  • 14-February-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