• 

  Town Planning. Areas designated for civic amenities, such as parks and parking, are sacrosanct and cannot be altered or encroached upon by the developer or landowner, even if an equivalent portion of land is offered in exchange. Karnataka High Court.

  • 08-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  When an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC is filed seeking rejection of a plaint, the court must decide it at the threshold before commencing the trial. Since the object of this provision is to weed out untenable suits at the outset, conducting a trial without first deciding the application would serve no purpose if the plaint is ultimately rejected. Karnataka High Court.

  • 08-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Once evidence is recorded, the trial court is required to return findings on all issues, not merely on a preliminary one. Limitation, being generally a mixed question of law and fact, cannot be treated as a preliminary issue to dismiss the suit in its entirety. Karnataka High Court.

  • 08-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  KT & CP Act. When designation of land in the Master Plan as park is lapsed due to non-acquisition within five years, the landowner is entitled for conversion of the land as per the new classification of the land under the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  An arbitration agreement in an unstamped or insufficiently stamped contract is valid and enforceable. Supreme Court.

  • 06-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  When certified copies of land grant orders are issued by the Tahsildar and the Regional Commissioner, the authenticity of the grants cannot be questioned, as it shows that the originals were held in their custody. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’Tutors cannot be treated as chattels and discarded without notice’’. Writ petition challenging their illegal termination is maintainable, even against an unaided educational institution. Karnataka High Court.

  • 08-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A registered partition deed, where a minor’s father has accepted cash in lieu of share, cannot be reopened as unequal or unjust unless the minor, on attaining majority, proves it was prejudicial to their interests. The burden lies on the plaintiff, and mere oral claims are insufficient to set aside a legally executed partition. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A second petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash criminal proceedings is not maintainable if it is founded on grounds that were manifestly available at the time of a previously filed petition. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  When an employee is insured under the Employees State Insurance Act, he or his dependents cannot make a claim for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of an employment injury sustained. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Stamp Act. Court cannot delegate its power to assess stamp duty and penalty to the District Registrar. It must itself examine the document, determine sufficiency of stamp duty, and, if deficient, compute the duty and penalty before directing payment. Karnataka High Court.

  • 04-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  DNA test for paternity can be ordered only when there is an ‘eminent need’ and a strong prima facie case is made out that it is not possible to determine the truth without such a test. The mere claim of a vasectomy is not sufficient to override the presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal