• 

  A defense that a registered sale deed was merely nominal or executed as loan security involves disputed factual issues that require a full trial and cannot be adjudicated at the interlocutory stage. Registered conveyances supported by revenue records establish a prima facie case of title and possession for the grant of a temporary injunction. Karnataka High Court.

  • 27-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Motor Vehicles Act. Where a victim dies long after the accident, the legal representatives must establish a clear link between the accident injuries and the death. In the absence of such proof, a claim for death compensation filed by the legal representatives is liable to be dismissed. Karnataka High Court

  • 27-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Section 23. Tribunal under the Act has no independent power to direct police protection in a dispute essentially concerning title to immovable property. Karnataka High Court.

  • 28-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Court in Section 34 proceedings cannot review its own judgment. The court cannot also modify, vary, or alter an arbitral award on merits. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 722

  • 24-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Right of pre-emption under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act applies to agricultural land. Supreme Court rejects the plea challenging the constitutional validity of the Section.

  • 24-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Mohammedan Law. A gift of immovable property between parties governed by Mohammedan Law does not require registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 even if reduced to writing provided the three essential conditions of declaration, acceptance, and delivery of possession are fulfilled. Consequently, revenue authorities cannot refuse to effect mutation in the Record of Rights solely on the ground that a written gift deed is unregistered. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 712

  • 24-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Transfer of Property Act. Section 11 which voids ‘’restriction repugnant to interest created upon transfer’’ applies only when the transfer is absolute and creates a complete interest in favour of the transferee. Non- exclusive rights over shared common facilities in a real estate project do not amount to an absolute interest. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 716

  • 24-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Income Tax Act. Mere delay in paying self-assessment or reassessed income tax even if settled after notice or enforcement steps does not automatically constitute wilful attempt to evade tax. Continuing criminal prosecution under Section 276C(2) is an abuse of process, entitling the accused to a discharge. Karnataka High Court.

  • 23-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A defendant cannot introduce a counterclaim whether directly or by seeking an amendment to the written statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC after issues have been framed and the trial has commenced. Judicial discretion to entertain a late counterclaim under Order VIII Rule 6A CPC is generally restricted to the pre-issue stage to prevent prejudice and endless delay. Karnataka High Court.

  • 23-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Section 340 CrPC. A ‘’wrong statement’’ is not the same as ‘’false statement’’. A false statement necessarily involves a deliberate intent to deceive, whereas an erroneous or inadvertent statement does not, by itself, attract criminal liability. Before directing prosecution under Section 340 CrPC, the Court must record a prima facie finding that an offence under Section 195 CrPC is made out. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 291

  • 22-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Motor Vehicles Act. A borrower/permissive user of a vehicle steps directly into the shoes of the owner and is not considered a ‘third party’. In case of self-accidents, such person is not entitled for compensation unless there is insurance coverage. Karnataka High Court.

  • 23-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Appreciation of evidence or factual findings regarding mutual contractual default and quantum of restitution falls squarely within the domain of the Arbitral Tribunal. So long as the tribunal's view is a plausible one based on record evidence, Courts will not interfere under the guise of patent illegality. Karnataka High Court.

  • 23-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal