• 

  Hindu Succession Act. A daughter is entitled to an equal share in coparcenary/joint ancestral property irrespective of whether she was born before or after 1956. Denying coparcenary rights to a daughter born prior to 1956 violates the mandate of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.

  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A mere subsequent failure to repay a loan or perform a contractual obligation, even after a long-standing relationship involving multiple transactions, does not retrospectively convert a civil dispute into a criminal offence. Where the complaint contains no specific averment of deception or dishonest inducement at the outset, the essential ingredients of cheating are not made out and the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.

  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Occupancy rights cannot be granted on the basis of oral evidence when official revenue records unequivocally establish that the land was Beelu (fallow) or otherwise uncultivated on the appointed day. In such circumstances, the statutory requirement of cultivation is not satisfied. Karnataka High Court.

  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Fraud vitiates all judicial proceedings. Where a motor accident claim is founded on fabricated evidence, suppression of material facts or false pleadings, the Court is justified in rejecting the claim in its entirety. Karnataka High Court.

  • 27-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Land Reforms Act. When agricultural land was under cultivation by the original family member prior to the crucial date, the conferment of occupancy rights in the individual name of a single family member enures to the benefit of the entire joint family. Karnataka High Court.

  • 28-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Hindu Succession Act. Section 5(ii). Private properties of the Ruler will be governed in terms of the personal law of the parties and impartible estate as that of perceived throne would devolve according to the rule of primogeniture. The Section does not deprive legal heirs of partition in private joint family estates. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 746

  • 31-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Motor Vehicles Act. Income Tax Returns are reliable statutory documents that cannot be disregarded by a Claims Tribunal for assessing the income of a deceased person merely because supporting educational certificates or business licenses were not produced. Karnataka High Court.

  • 28-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Writ petition against a Trade Union to restrain the proposed strike during the pendency of conciliation proceeding, as a general rule is not maintainable. Such recourse may be available in exceptional circumstances, brought about in a given case. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 781

  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. An order of the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 is ordinarily challengeable only under Section 34 after the final award. The High Court may interfere under Article 227 only upon recording a prima facie finding of a patent lack of inherent jurisdiction, after hearing the rival parties. Supreme Court reiterates.

  • 28-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Specific performance. Transfer of an undivided share in immovable property is legally valid. Joint ownership alone does not render an agreement to sell suspicious or unenforceable merely because the vendor’s co-sharer/brother was not made a signatory. Supreme Court

  • 28-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’The judiciary commands neither the purse nor the sword’’ However, the Courts are duty-bound to ensure that their injunction orders do not remain mere paper decrees by granting police protection wherever necessary to secure their effective enforcement. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 733

  • 26-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The power to grant police protection is ancillary to the Court's jurisdiction to ensure effective enforcement of a subsisting injunction. Each violation of the injunction order constitutes a fresh cause of action unaffected by the doctrine of res judicata. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 733

  • 27-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal