• 

  Land acquisition Act of 2013. Claimants who did not initially seek enhancement are entitled to seek redetermination of compensation under Section 28A(3), in line with the final award. The Reference Court cannot dismiss such a petition as time-barred, since there is no prescribed limitation period for challenging an order passed under Section 28A(2) while seeking a reference under Section 28A(3). Karnataka High Court.

  • 28-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  District Government Pleader. State action relating to appointments or removals must conform to the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The abrupt cancellation or termination of an appointment within 24 hours, without assigning any reason, amounts to arbitrary exercise of power, violates Article 14, and is liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.

  • 28-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Criminal complaint for cheating and a complaint for cheque dishonour arising from the same transaction are maintainable simultaneously, as they are based on two distinct acts, the initial fraudulent inducement and the subsequent failure to honour a legally dischargeable debt. Karnataka High Court.

  • 27-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. An Arbitral Tribunal's award of interest higher than the rate expressly stipulated in the contract on contractual amounts constitutes a patent error and is liable to be set aside under Section 34/37 to the extent of the excess interest awarded. Karnataka High Court.

  • 27-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Where a judgment debtor has been put on notice at every stage of the execution proceedings leading up to an auction sale and has either participated or acquiesced by taking no action to raise a material irregularity, he is precluded from subsequently seeking to set aside the sale on that very ground. Supreme Court.

  • 27-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Resjudicata. A mixed question of law and fact once decided between the same parties cannot be reopened in later proceedings and the interpretation of a statute will operate as res judicata where the cause of action remains the same. A pure question of law involving the court’s jurisdiction or validating an illegality is not barred by res judicata, since procedural rules cannot override substantive law. Karnataka High Court.

  • 26-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A lease renewal or extension clause is not absolute and cannot be specifically enforced where it expressly makes renewal subject to the lessor’s consent. If the landlord refuses consent after the original term expires, the tenancy lawfully ends and the tenant’s continued possession becomes unlawful. Karnataka High Court.

  • 26-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules. A quarrying lease for an area less than the mandatory minimum of two acres can be granted only if it falls under a cluster approach and implements common Environmental Management Plan. In the absence of such material, the rejection of the application is valid and cannot be faulted. Karnataka High Court.

  • 26-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  In a suit for cancellation of a sale deed where the deed itself reflects the property's value, the court fee must be paid ad valorem on that stated value. Valuation based on land assessment applies only when no material exists to determine market value. Karnataka High Court.

  • 26-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Withholding of monthly salary from employees, even under the pretext of pending litigation challenging their appointment, for an extended period despite their continuous discharge of duties, constitutes a form of 'begar' or forced labor and is a direct violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 23 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.

  • 26-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal shall reject a petition where the claimant fails to prove the accident and involvement of the vehicle, especially when there is unexplained delay in filing the FIR and major inconsistencies in records suggesting false implication of the insured vehicle. Karnataka High Court.

  • 25-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Civil Rights Enforcement Cell does not have the power to take up suo motu investigation into the caste certificate. Its power to conduct a detailed investigation emerges only upon a specific reference made by the District Caste Verification Committee. Karnataka High Court.

  • 25-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal