• 

  Commercial Contracts. Courts cannot rewrite or alter the terms of a commercial contract voluntarily entered into by the parties. A clause stipulating that a security deposit shall not carry interest is valid, binding, and not opposed to public policy. A party who has accepted the contract with full knowledge of its terms cannot later avoid or challenge them merely on the ground that they are onerous. Supreme Court.

  • 16-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Tortious Liability. Human life is beyond pecuniary valuation. Where compensation is offered in lieu of criminal proceedings, the Court cannot accept a settlement that is manifestly disproportionate to the gravity of the loss. The Karnataka High Court quashes the criminal proceedings after ensuring substantial and structured restitution to the bereaved family of the deceased child. Karnataka High Court.

  • 23-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Negotiable Instruments Act. Where the cheque was drawn on a company's account and signed by its Managing Director or Director, arraigning the Company as a principal accused is an absolute and mandatory condition precedent. In the absence of the company being arraigned as an accused, the complaint is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Land Acquisition. Principles of res judicata, doctrine of merger, and finality of litigation do not apply when a transaction, administrative action, or judicial decree is subsequently discovered to be tainted by fraud, suppression of material facts, or manipulation of official records. Karnataka High Court quashes the land acquisition proceedings after 37 years.

  • 16-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Income Tax Act. Though quoting a Document Identification Number (DIN) in Income Tax communications is mandatory an order is not invalid merely because it was initially communicated without a DIN, if the correct DIN is subsequently communicated through an authenticated intimation letter. Karnataka High Court.

  • 21-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Land acquisition. Substantial compliance with Section 5A is sufficient; every procedural irregularity does not invalidate acquisition. Selection of land for a public project is primarily within the domain of the Government and expert authorities; courts should not substitute their opinion unless the decision is arbitrary, mala fide, or illegal. Supreme Court

  • 20-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’Mandate First, Gains Later; SEBI Compliance, Never Falter’’. Compliance with the SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations is mandatory and cannot be overridden by commercial prudence or perceived investor benefit. Once a statutory violation is established, penalty ordinarily follows irrespective of mens rea, unless the statute provides otherwise. Supreme Court.

  • 15-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The presumption of constitutionality not just applies to plenary legislation but also to subordinate legislation. It is a rebuttable presumption and the burden will be on the petitioners to displace the presumption. Supreme Court.

  • 24-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC. Setting aside a compromise decree. A stranger claiming a derivative title through a party to the suit must approach the compromise-recording court. However, where the claim is based on an independent, pre-existing title, a separate suit is maintainable. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 598

  • 15-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  DNA Test. When adult plaintiffs voluntarily request a DNA test to establish their biological roots, issues concerning the invasion of their privacy or the social stigmatization of their birth do not arise. When major discrepancies exist in the available oral and documentary evidence, making it insufficient to prove or disprove a biological link, a scientific DNA test is a permissible route to resolve foundational identity questions. Karnataka High Court.

  • 15-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  An agreement to sell executed during a statutory prohibition on sale does not itself amount to a conveyance or transfer of title and is not void ab initio. Where the statutory bar has been repealed before the suit is instituted, the Court cannot deny specific performance only on the basis of the repealed prohibition. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 613

  • 15-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Default Bail. A mechanical order extending the time to file the charge-sheet, passed without due application of mind, is grossly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the accused's fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, thereby entitling the accused to default bail. Supreme Court.

  • 15-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal