• 

  Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC. The discretionary power to permit withdrawal of a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit cannot be invoked where the alleged 'formal defect' relates to a mere imperfection in the pleadings which can be cured by way of an amendment to the plaint. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Service law. Dropping of the inquiry operates retrospectively, entitling the employee to all withheld benefits and consequential interest from the date of retirement. Withholding of a retired employee's commuted value of pension is arbitrary and unsustainable in law if the underlying disciplinary proceedings are subsequently dropped. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Suit for specific performance. A court exercising its equitable discretion may impose a condition that the purchaser pay an enhanced sale consideration significantly higher than the agreed price to the vendor, in order to balance the equities arising from the escalation of property value due to the efflux of time during litigation. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Motor Vehicles Act (unamended). The Insurer is liable to indemnify the owner for an accident that occurs within the 30 days grace period after expiry of the license period as the driver is deemed to possess a valid licence. Absence of a driving licence does not per se establish contributory negligence unless a direct link is proved between the lack of the licence and the occurrence of the accident. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Partial rejection of a plaint is impermissible. Even in a partition suit where certain properties are alleged to be unavailable, the court’s power extends only to rejecting the plaint in its entirety, as the expression “plaint” denotes the whole pleading. This power is distinct from the striking out of portions of the plaint. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Eviction suit by co-landlord is maintainable even if one co-landlord transfers his interest during the suit's pendency. The failure to formally record the assignment under Order XXII Rule 10 of the CPC does not automatically render the suit non-maintainable, especially when the assignee continues to prosecute the case on behalf of the surviving co-landlord. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A condition in a tender document that creates an arbitrary and discriminatory classification based on the ownership of a resource, while the material quality and fitness of that resource remain identical, is unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Liquidator is entitled to forfeit the entire earnest money deposit and participation deposit money when a successful bidder in an e-auction fails to unconditionally accept the Letter of Intent as per the terms of the auction memorandum. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Land acquisition. A landowner who has unequivocally expressed ‘No Objection’ to the land acquisition proceedings and sought compensation is not entitled to subsequently seek deletion of their lands from the acquisition. The deletion of such lands cannot be justified on the principle of negative equality, especially when the land forms a large, compact, vacant block suitable for the layout, and any administrative order for deletion is without a proper BDA Board resolution. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Arbitration can be only between parties to the arbitration agreement. Directors or Shareholders cannot be made parties to arbitration proceedings merely because they are related to the company or due to concerns about the company's ability to pay. Karnataka High Court.

  • 14-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Mohammedan Law. The mere registration of a gift deed does not, by itself, establish compliance with all legal requirements. A valid gift must be supported by three essential elements: a clear declaration by the donor, acceptance by the donee, and contemporaneous as well as continuous delivery of possession to the donee. Unless these elements are proved, the donor remains entitled to subsequently alienate the property, and the donee cannot rely on an earlier, unproven gift to challenge the validity of later transactions. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A petition under Section 11 though filed before the expiry of the mandatory 30-day notice period, need not be dismissed on technical grounds if the respondent concurs with the arbitrator's appointment. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal