• 

  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
• 

  Land Acquisition Act 1894. Interest under Section 28 is an accretion to the value of the land and hence forms part of the enhanced compensation. Land acquisition authorities cannot deduct Tax deduction at source (TDS) on such payments made to the landowners. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Government establishes web-enabled Revenue Court Case Monitoring System to effectively track cases before the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner and Tahsildar courts, from case initiation through proceedings and final orders, with public access to dispute survey numbers and judgments. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Following the Karnataka High Court’s identification of procedural lapses, Government introduces Revenue Court Cases Monitoring System for the effective management of Land Tribunal cases. Constitutes a dedicated committee.

  • 13-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Labour Law. When a reinstatement award is passed in favor of a workman, and the implementation of that award is subsequently stayed by an appellate court upon the employer's challenge, the principle of ‘no work no pay’ will not apply for the period the stay order was in operation, as the workman was prevented from working due to the employer's legal challenge. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Though in cases involving violations of the principles of natural justice, the appropriate course is to remand the matter to afford the concerned party an opportunity of hearing, the contemporary view is to curtail litigation and not to multiply. An unwarranted remand by a higher court only initiates a fresh round of proceedings, which ought to be avoided. Supreme Court.

  • 15-December-2025
  • Daksha Legal