• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation. Act. An order rejecting a jurisdictional objection under Section 16 is ordinarily not amenable to writ jurisdiction. Such objections can be challenged only in proceedings under Section 34 after the arbitral award. Allegations of forgery involving disputed questions of fact requiring evidence should ordinarily be adjudicated by the Arbitral Tribunal along with the merits of the dispute. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 286-294

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Transfer of Property Act. If a vendor alienates sites formed on a property before allotment of that property to his share in a family partition, such allotment automatically validates the prior transfers by operation of law under Section 43. Karnataka High Court 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 279-285

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Police should not investigate disputes relating to title deeds, revenue entries, powers of attorney, or sale deeds unless the allegations clearly disclose criminality. At the time of framing charges Criminal Courts must ensure that the material on record raises a strong suspicion of an offence and a reasonable prospect of conviction. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 253-273

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Advocates, merely by a reason of appearing for a litigant cannot be exposed to criminal prosecution and trauma of investigative proceedings. The inevitable consequence would be a chilling and paralyzing effect upon fearless discharge of professional responsibilities. Karnataka High Court quashes criminal proceedings against the Advocate. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 253-273

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘A person who tries to appropriate the benefits due to a Scheduled Tribe by dubious means, not only commits an illegal act but also denies a rightful candidate such benefits and normally does not deserve any grace’. Supreme Court ends criminal prosecution since no benefit was obtained on the basis of the false claim.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Motor Vehicles Act. Insurance Company is liable under ‘pay and recover’ principle even in cases of ‘Act Liability Only Policy’ and no premium was paid to cover risk of driver, owner or gratuitous passenger in motor vehicle. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 274-278

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Transfer of Property Act. When both parties to a suit trace title to a common vendor, the earlier registered conveyance ordinarily prevails, subject to identification of property. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 279-285

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Greater Bengaluru Governance Act. Section 159. Authorities cannot insist on the deposit of 50% of the property tax demand as a condition for considering a reply to a show-cause notice. Such a requirement is applicable only at the appellate stage. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Partnership (Registration of Firms) Rules. The requirement of intimating the District Registrar about the reconstitution of a partnership firm within fifteen days is directory and not mandatory. Mere delay in filing the application cannot be a ground to refuse registration or recording of the reconstitution. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A decree obtained by fraud cannot operate as res judicata in subsequent proceedings. Fraud vitiates both judicial decrees and consequential transfers. The doctrines of res judicata and constructive res judicata cannot be invoked to sustain a decree founded on fraud or collusion, as fraud unravels everything. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 295-331

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Environment. Bar against quarrying in a lake bed cannot be relaxed simply because the lake has remained dry for decades. State cannot be estopped from refusing permissions notwithstanding prior ‘no-objection’ reports. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Filing multiple FIRs arising out of the same transaction or occurrence is not permissible since the law contemplates a single comprehensive investigation, permitting further investigation and supplementary reports, but not parallel or overlapping investigations. Consolidation of such proceedings is necessary to avoid conflicting findings, multiplicity of litigation, and prejudice to the accused while ensuring an effective and coordinated investigation. Supreme Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal