Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. A victim cannot file second appeal against the order of acquittal either under Section 413 or by seeking special leave under Section 419 since affirming order of acquittal by the Appellate Court is final and not subject to review. Karnataka High Court.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. A victim cannot file second appeal against the order of acquittal either under Section 413 or by seeking special leave under Section 419 since affirming order of acquittal by the Appellate Court is final and not subject to review. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. There is no bar to entertain an appeal even after expiry of 180 days. Karnataka High Court.
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. There is no bar to entertain an appeal even after expiry of 180 days. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-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
‘In the rapidly mutating landscape of cyber enabled financial frauds, deception no longer adheres to the crude paradigm of cash deposits’. Karnataka High Court refuses to quash criminal proceedings related to ‘Digital Gold Scheme’.
‘In the rapidly mutating landscape of cyber enabled financial frauds, deception no longer adheres to the crude paradigm of cash deposits’. Karnataka High Court refuses to quash criminal proceedings related to ‘Digital Gold Scheme’.
  • 04-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
When a new legislative enactment comes into force repealing the old enactment, the authorities can no longer exercise enforcement powers under the superseded or repealed statute. For any enforcement action to be valid, it must strictly adhere to the procedural and substantive requirements of the legislation currently in effect at the time the action is initiated. Karnataka High Court.
When a new legislative enactment comes into force repealing the old enactment, the authorities can no longer exercise enforcement powers under the superseded or repealed statute. For any enforcement action to be valid, it must strictly adhere to the procedural and substantive requirements of the legislation currently in effect at the time the action is initiated. Karnataka High Court.
  • 05-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order XXII Rule 5 CPC. At the stage of substituting Legal Representatives the Court is only required to determine who has the right to represent the estate of the deceased for the purpose of continuing the litigation. A disputed Will cannot be used at this preliminary stage to exclude other natural heirs or to seek a summary adjudication on the Will's validity. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXII Rule 5 CPC. At the stage of substituting Legal Representatives the Court is only required to determine who has the right to represent the estate of the deceased for the purpose of continuing the litigation. A disputed Will cannot be used at this preliminary stage to exclude other natural heirs or to seek a summary adjudication on the Will's validity. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A suit for bare permanent injunction is maintainable even without a prayer for declaration of title, provided the plaintiff establishes 'settled possession' of the suit property as on the date of the suit. If the defendants fail to prove that they successfully dispossessed the plaintiff or that the plaintiff’s possession is unlawful, the court is bound to protect the plaintiff’s peaceful enjoyment of the property against any high-handed interference by the defendants. Karnataka High Court.
A suit for bare permanent injunction is maintainable even without a prayer for declaration of title, provided the plaintiff establishes 'settled possession' of the suit property as on the date of the suit. If the defendants fail to prove that they successfully dispossessed the plaintiff or that the plaintiff’s possession is unlawful, the court is bound to protect the plaintiff’s peaceful enjoyment of the property against any high-handed interference by the defendants. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. In proceedings for the regularization of unauthorized cultivation of government land under Chapter XIII-A, an application cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the remaining land would be insufficient for free pasturage since the statutory proviso to the Rules explicitly exempts regularization cases from the requirement of maintaining a minimum pasturage limit and from the necessity of obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner for such reduction. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. In proceedings for the regularization of unauthorized cultivation of government land under Chapter XIII-A, an application cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the remaining land would be insufficient for free pasturage since the statutory proviso to the Rules explicitly exempts regularization cases from the requirement of maintaining a minimum pasturage limit and from the necessity of obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner for such reduction. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Non mentioning of water bodies and storm water drain in the Comprehensive Development Plan is inconsequential for exercising statutory power to remove encroachment or blockage of natural water course which actually exist on the lands. A sanctioned building plan or the issuance of an Occupancy Certificate does not validate the encroachment or obstruction of a storm water drain. Karnataka High Court.
Non mentioning of water bodies and storm water drain in the Comprehensive Development Plan is inconsequential for exercising statutory power to remove encroachment or blockage of natural water course which actually exist on the lands. A sanctioned building plan or the issuance of an Occupancy Certificate does not validate the encroachment or obstruction of a storm water drain. Karnataka High Court.
  • 04-March-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