• 

  Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. Order of the Adjudicating Officer or the Appellate Tribunal is not a ‘decree’ within the meaning of Section 2(2) CPC. Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain execution proceedings in respect of such orders. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Wildlife (Protection) Act. Where land within a National Park’s notified limits is voluntarily surrendered under a Resettlement and Rehabilitation scheme, compensation must be determined under the land acquisition law in force when the scheme was framed, and not under the 2013 Act, even if the surrender occurred after the 2013 Act came into force. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Labour Law. A Certified Standing Order or condition of service, specifically the age of superannuation, cannot be unilaterally amended by the Certifying Officer during the subsistence of a binding settlement that prohibits the raising of demands involving additional financial burden. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  When the Magistrate fails to issue a fresh remand order upon the expiry of the previous period of judicial custody, particularly when the mandatory requirement of producing the accused for such extension is not complied with, the continued detention becomes illegal, thereby entitling the accused to bail. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. The Tribunal cannot annul a property transfer unless the transfer expressly or impliedly mandates the transferee to provide maintenance to the senior citizen. Where the transaction is an amicable family settlement, the Tribunal lacks the requisite jurisdiction to treat the transaction as void. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Excise (General Conditions of Licences) Rules. ‘Transfer of property’ is different from ‘transmission of property’. Change in the constitution of a partnership firm resulting from death of a constituent partner cannot be termed as transfer to impose transfer fee. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Public Distribution System. An authorization holder of a fair price shop has no vested right to exclusivity or to challenge a notification for the establishment of an additional fair price shop in the same locality especially when his authorization is not cancelled and the number of assigned ration cards is not reduced below the minimum threshold. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Electricity Act. Civil Court jurisdiction is expressly barred to entertain a suit seeking a declaration and injunction against a demand notice where the dispute concerns the applicable tariff head. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Departmental proceedings initiated against a retired government servant more than four years after the date of the event are void and barred by limitation. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Plaintiff in a suit for declaration of title and possession could succeed only on the strength of its own title and that could be done only by adducing sufficient evidence to discharge the onus on it, irrespective of the question whether the defendants have proved their case or not. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Suit for partition. Property acquired using the sale proceeds of admitted joint family property is prima facie deemed to be joint family property, and its alienation by any co-parcener must be restrained to protect the interests of all members and prevent irreparable loss during the pendency of the suit. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A Disciplinary Authority cannot order a fresh inquiry on the same charges after the first inquiry officer has exonerated the employee. Its power is confined to accepting or dissenting from the report based on the existing record, as repeated inquiries to secure a desired result constitute an abuse of process and violate principles of administrative justice. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal