• 

  Suit for partition. Joint family property inadvertently omitted from the plaint and the consequent preliminary decree can be included during the final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Indian Succession Act. A person who claims a right to the testator's property adverse to the testator's title and who is not an heir under succession or inheritance, does not have a ‘caveatable interest’ and cannot be impleaded as an objector in a petition for the grant of probate. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Where a contract allows one party to unilaterally terminate it under specified conditions, and such termination is exercised, a suit for specific performance without seeking a declaration that the termination is invalid is not maintainable. Supreme Court.

  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Transfer of property under an unregistered General Power of Attorney is void in law. The possession delivered under such a document cannot override the lawful ownership of the true owner. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Order VII Rule 11 CPC. A plaint is liable to rejection when the suit is ex facie barred by limitation and the plaintiff fails to disclose a definite right or clear cause of action owing to vague, inconsistent, and contradictory pleadings or documents concerning the alleged title or relationship with the property. The ancillary relief of partition, being contingent upon the time-barred relief of declaration, is equally unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Land Reforms Act. Grant of occupancy rights to one member of a joint family enures to the benefit of the entire joint family and is subject to partition, provided the land was cultivated by the family's ancestors and the application was filed by that member on behalf of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  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