• 

  The Debt Recovery Tribunal does not have inherent power to refund court fees in the absence of an express statutory provision. Payment of statutory fees is not governed by a strict quid pro quo; once the fee is paid for filing, it cannot be reclaimed merely because the matter is settled or withdrawn. The General Clauses Act also does not confer an implied power to refund fees simply because an authority has the power to collect them. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Partition. The principle that there cannot be a partial partition is not an absolute one. Partial partition is permissible by exercising power under Section 151 of the CPC. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Urban Planning. A person who voluntarily relinquishes portion of land in favour of Planning Authority is deemed to have 'acquiesced' to that action. Such a party cannot later belatedly challenge the validity of the notification simply because other similarly situated persons succeeded in a legal challenge. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A public official who carries out demolition of a property without following the mandatory statutory procedures is personally liable to compensate the affected party for the illegal demolition. The plea that the official acted at the instance or behest of a private individual does not absolve him of liability toward the victim, though it may reserve a right for the official to seek indemnity. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Specific Relief Act. A contract of personal service with a private entity is not specifically enforceable. A suit filed by a private employee seeking a mandatory injunction for reinstatement or the quashing of a termination notice is ex-facie barred by law. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A government circular imposing ban on sale of sites formed in a layout without obtaining a release from the Planning Authority cannot be applied retrospectively to divest a property owner of rights acquired through a registered sale deed executed prior to the date of the circular. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A failed romantic relationship that does not result in marriage cannot, by itself, be characterized as a criminal offense. Unless the allegations clearly establish the essential ingredients of a crime, the police cannot investigate a complaint that is essentially a byproduct of personal heartbreak. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A Deputy Commissioner or municipal authority does not possess the inherent or statutory jurisdiction to summarily cancel a long-standing Khata without a clear finding of fraud or a decree from a competent Civil Court. While the State can initiate action against illegal encroachments, it cannot use administrative proceedings to adjudicate complex disputes of title; the proper remedy remains with the Civil Court. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Prevention of Corruption Act. Where prima facie material, such as recovery of tainted money, recorded conversation, or forensic evidence shows demand or receipt of a bribe, departmental exoneration cannot override the criminal prosecution. The allegations must be tested in a full-fledged trial under the stricter standard of proof, particularly where the government servant is caught red-handed. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Income Tax Act. Assessing Officer cannot reopen a completed scrutiny assessment under Section 147/148 based on a mere 'change of opinion' regarding the same set of facts and documents that were already examined during the initial assessment. To validly exercise the power of reopening, the department must demonstrate the existence of 'new or tangible material' that was not available or considered during the original proceedings. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. The requirement to relinquish a portion of private land for public purposes as a prerequisite for the sanctioning of a building plan or layout does not amount to 'compulsory acquisition'. Since such relinquishment is a statutory condition for the grant of a development permit, the landowner is not entitled to compensation. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A land owner's right to seek conversion of land from agricultural to non-agricultural use cannot be denied by the Deputy Commissioner solely on the ground that there is a proposal or a preliminary notification for future land acquisition by the State. Until the land is formally vested in the State through a final award and possession, the owner retains the right to put the land to better use, and authorities are obligated to process conversion application. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal