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
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
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
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. An approved Resolution Plan operates as a final settlement of all claims against the Corporate Debtor. All statutory dues, including tax liabilities, that do not form part of the resolution plan stand permanently extinguished. Any assessment orders or demand notices issued by the Income Tax Department for periods prior to the approval of the plan are void ab initio and without jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. An approved Resolution Plan operates as a final settlement of all claims against the Corporate Debtor. All statutory dues, including tax liabilities, that do not form part of the resolution plan stand permanently extinguished. Any assessment orders or demand notices issued by the Income Tax Department for periods prior to the approval of the plan are void ab initio and without jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A registered Sale Deed executed by a Housing Co-operative Society in favor of its member cannot be cancelled unilaterally by the Society through a subsequent Deed of Cancellation. The power to cancel a registered instrument vests exclusively with the Civil Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act. Any subsequent allotment or sale of the same property to a third party, predicated upon such a void cancellation deed, is invalid and does not affect the absolute ownership of the original purchaser. Karnataka High Court.
A registered Sale Deed executed by a Housing Co-operative Society in favor of its member cannot be cancelled unilaterally by the Society through a subsequent Deed of Cancellation. The power to cancel a registered instrument vests exclusively with the Civil Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act. Any subsequent allotment or sale of the same property to a third party, predicated upon such a void cancellation deed, is invalid and does not affect the absolute ownership of the original purchaser. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Executive authorities, including the Special Deputy Commissioner, has no inherent statutory jurisdiction to cancel a registered instrument under the Registration Act since a registered sale deed can only be cancelled or set aside by a competent Civil Court through a substantive suit. Any such order of cancellation is a nullity, and the mere passage of time or delay in challenging such an order does not validate an action taken without the authority of law. Karnataka High Court.
Executive authorities, including the Special Deputy Commissioner, has no inherent statutory jurisdiction to cancel a registered instrument under the Registration Act since a registered sale deed can only be cancelled or set aside by a competent Civil Court through a substantive suit. Any such order of cancellation is a nullity, and the mere passage of time or delay in challenging such an order does not validate an action taken without the authority of law. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A party who disputes the very existence or execution of the agreement cannot maintain an application for referral to arbitration under Section 8, as the existence of a valid and admitted agreement is the jurisdictional bedrock for such an order. A Trial Court exceeds its jurisdiction if it refers parties to arbitration when the underlying agreement is denied by the applicant themselves. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A party who disputes the very existence or execution of the agreement cannot maintain an application for referral to arbitration under Section 8, as the existence of a valid and admitted agreement is the jurisdictional bedrock for such an order. A Trial Court exceeds its jurisdiction if it refers parties to arbitration when the underlying agreement is denied by the applicant themselves. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Mere pendency of writ petition or writ appeal or SLP will not extend time to pass award under the Land Acquisition Act unless interim orders prevented passing of the award. Karnataka High Court.
Mere pendency of writ petition or writ appeal or SLP will not extend time to pass award under the Land Acquisition Act unless interim orders prevented passing of the award. Karnataka High Court.
  • 12-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