• 

  Greater Bengaluru Governance Act. Section 159. Authorities cannot insist on the deposit of 50% of the property tax demand as a condition for considering a reply to a show-cause notice. Such a requirement is applicable only at the appellate stage. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Partnership (Registration of Firms) Rules. The requirement of intimating the District Registrar about the reconstitution of a partnership firm within fifteen days is directory and not mandatory. Mere delay in filing the application cannot be a ground to refuse registration or recording of the reconstitution. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A decree obtained by fraud cannot operate as res judicata in subsequent proceedings. Fraud vitiates both judicial decrees and consequential transfers. The doctrines of res judicata and constructive res judicata cannot be invoked to sustain a decree founded on fraud or collusion, as fraud unravels everything. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 295

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Environment. Bar against quarrying in a lake bed cannot be relaxed simply because the lake has remained dry for decades. State cannot be estopped from refusing permissions notwithstanding prior ‘no-objection’ reports. Karnataka High Court.

  • 17-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Filing multiple FIRs arising out of the same transaction or occurrence is not permissible since the law contemplates a single comprehensive investigation, permitting further investigation and supplementary reports, but not parallel or overlapping investigations. Consolidation of such proceedings is necessary to avoid conflicting findings, multiplicity of litigation, and prejudice to the accused while ensuring an effective and coordinated investigation. Supreme Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Where recruitment is conducted for a regular post, a selected and eligible candidate cannot be appointed as contractual appointee without valid reasons. Mere acceptance of such an appointment does not cure the illegality. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 194

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  National Education Policy. ''Formulate comprehensive policy for the effective implementation of the constitutional mandate relating to mother tongue-based education''. Supreme Court directs the State of Rajasthan..

  • 15-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Negotiable Instruments Act. Where a single transaction gives rise to multiple cheques and multiple complaints, the Court cannot impose separate default sentences in each case.Imprisonment in default under Section 138 is a regulatory and coercive mechanism to compel monetary compliance, not a substantive criminal punishment. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Appreciation of evidence. Title of a document is immaterial. The Courts must examine the contents and the intention of the parties which can be gathered from the circumstances under which document was entered and the language used by the parties. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  An executing court has jurisdiction to re-determine or vary the shares of the parties in a manner contrary to the shares declared and crystallized under the preliminary decree if a subsequent event or a legislative amendment affecting the parties’ entitlement intervenes after the decree. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Prevention of Money Laundering Act. In the absence of an FIR or a complaint before the Magistrate, the Directorate of Enforcement cannot pass an attachment order. Invocation of the first proviso to Section 5(1) requires independent reasons to believe, based on objective material, that immediate attachment is necessary to prevent frustration of the proceedings. Failure to comply with these requirements vitiates the attachment order. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The bar of jurisdiction of Civil Courts under a statute applies to suits challenging actions or resolutions of statutory authorities. Where the plaintiff merely assails such statutory action without seeking a declaration of title, the suit is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.

  • 16-June-2026
  • Daksha Legal