• 

  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
• 

  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
• 

  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
• 

  Indian Succession Act. Succession Certificate cannot be issued in respect of immovable property in Karnataka. Authorities cannot insist on production of Succession Certificate for transfer of khata of the property bequeathed under a Will. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Ancestral property fallen to the share of father in a family partition among his father and brothers cannot be claimed by his son since the property so allocated to his share becomes his exclusive property. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Hindu Law. Gift by a coparcener of his undivided interest in the coparcenary property either to a stranger or to his relation without the consent of the other coparcener is void. Comprehensive Judgement of the Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The power of review is a substantive power that must be specifically conferred by statute; it cannot be assumed by an executive authority nor can it be conferred through an executive order in violation of statutory prohibitions. Allowing a Revenue Officer to review its own concluded quasi-judicial order would trench upon the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. Supreme Court.

  • 13-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Land acquisition. Where a landowner participates in deliberations to determine the quantum of compensation and accepts a portion of that compensation, he is deemed to have acquiesced to the acquisition and cannot subsequently challenge its validity. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Rent Act. Rent Court has no jurisdiction to award 'damages' or 'mesne profits' for the continued occupation of the premises by the tenant during the pendency of the litigation. Such a claim for damages constitutes a distinct cause of action that must be pursued by the landlord through a separate substantive civil suit. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Evidence Act. A judicial admission made by a party in prior legal proceedings regarding the execution of a Will constitutes 'estoppel by record.' Such an admission dispenses with the formal requirement of proving the Will's execution. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Stamp Act. Where the parties are already in possession of the property prior to the agreement, or where possession is not delivered under the document, the document cannot be subjected to the higher stamp duty and penalty associated with 'possession delivered' agreement. Karnataka High Court.

  • 11-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. When a plaintiff seeks a declaration that a document is void, without claiming the consequential reliefs of possession or injunction related to that declaration, the court fee is to be computed on the value assigned by the plaintiff in the plaint, and not on the market value of the property. Karnataka High Court.

  • 10-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal