• 

  Writ Jurisdiction. A court cannot impose financial or administrative liability on the State without formally impleading it as a necessary party. Mere impleadment of an officer or a department, without formally arraying the State as a juristic entity under Article 300 of the Constitution, renders the petition fundamentally defective. Supreme Court.

  • 14-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Bangalore Development Authority cannot unilaterally demand betterment tax without complying with the procedure under Section 21 of the BDA Act, which mandates prior written notice, an opportunity to submit objections and be heard, and reference to the District Court for determination where the assessed amount is disputed, instead of directly demanding payment. Karnataka High Court.

  • 14-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Amendment of pleadings after commencement of the trial. Mere delay in seeking amendment is not, by itself, a ground for rejection. Subsequent discovery of relevant proceedings may justify such amendment. The decisive test is whether the proposed amendment introduces a distinct and independent controversy or merely incorporates additional facts and consequential reliefs directly connected with the existing cause of action. Supreme Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act – Juridical Seat and Venue. Where an arbitration agreement specifies two different places for arbitration, neither place can automatically be treated as the juridical seat. The seat must be determined by a harmonious reading of the entire agreement, including the governing law and exclusive jurisdiction clauses, to ascertain the parties’ true intention. Supreme Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Tender. 'Rigid adherence to the letter of a document cannot be countenanced, especially when there is a clear impossibility in compliance of the same'. A bid cannot be rejected merely for failure to produce a physical original of bid security when electronic payment has already transferred the funds to the authority and the prescribed physical form is inapplicable. Supreme Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’Treating unequals as equals violates the constitutional principle of proportional equality’’. Reservation exceeding the prescribed ceiling of 50% in educational institutions and public employment, in the absence of constitutionally permissible exceptional circumstances, is impermissible. Karnataka High Court strikes down the State legislation providing reservation beyond the 50% ceiling.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Suit for Declaration of Title and Injunction. Where the plaintiff establishes title but fails to prove possession, and the defendant proves possession but fails to establish adverse possession, the Court may mould the relief by granting a declaration of title and recovery of possession, as the defendant has no sustainable defence against such relief. Karnataka High Court.

  • 12-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Irrespective of whether the non-alienation period has expired, obtaining prior permission of the Government under Section 4(2) of the Act is a mandatory to transfer granted land. Further, a Tahsildar has no power to issue a ‘No Objection Certificate’ permitting sale of the granted lands. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’Pathi Patni Aur Woh’’. Sexual intercourse by married person employing deceitful means or false promises. Wife of the accused cannot be dragged into the criminal proceedings under Section 69 of the BNS. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1423.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Land Reforms Rules. Whenever multiple applications in Form No. 7 are filed by different claimants in respect of the same land/survey number, the Land Tribunal must club the applications together and decide them through a single, common order. Deciding rival claims through separate, independent orders renders such orders non-est in the eye of law. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Proof of Will. Registered instrument bearing the photograph and signature of the testator, evidencing his personal presentation before the Sub-Registrar and the endorsement made under Section 60 of the Registration Act raise a presumption that registration was effected upon verification of the testator’s identity and execution of the Wills. These circumstances, coupled with the other evidence on record, sufficiently establish the execution of the Wills by the testator. Karnataka High Court.

  • 13-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Where the genuineness of an Agreement of Sale is directly in issue in a pending suit for specific performance, criminal proceeding alleging forgery of the very same document is premature. Though a civil dispute does not bar criminal prosecution, parallel proceedings involving the identical foundational shall be avoided until its adjudication by the Civil Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar.1392

  • 10-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal