• 

  Article 14 of the Constitution of India does not envisage any negative equality and the fact that any person has been wrongfully granted any benefit, would not be a ground for extending the benefit to all. Karnataka High Court.

  • 30-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Transfer of Property Act. Continuous possession of a tenant in the suit property even after entering into the sale agreement would not by itself amount to a part-performance within the meaning of Section 53A. Supreme Court.

  • 22-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Claim over land by adverse possession and also as a tenant under the Act are mutually destructive pleas which disentitles the person from the grant of occupancy rights under the Act. Karnataka High Court.

  • 22-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The right of pre-emption under Mahomedan Law requires strict and literal compliance with the dual formalities of Talab-i-Mowasibat and Talab-i-Ishhad. A co-sharer who remains in joint possession and asserts their demand immediately upon the knowledge of a sale to a stranger, while invoking witnesses and offering the same price paid by the stranger, is entitled to a decree of pre-emption. Karnataka High Court.

  • 22-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Karnataka High Court urges review of provisions allowing revenue authorities to conduct parallel adjudication of disputes which are again subject to the final determination by a competent Civil Court. Recommends empowering Civil Courts to stay orders under the Act.

  • 22-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Rape. The statute punishes deceit, not disappointment; fraud, not failed affection; and exploitation, not the collapse of relationship. Prolonged consensual relationship cannot be characterized as ‘rape’ under the guise of a ‘false promise of marriage’ if the relationship fails to culminate in a wedding due to subsequent discord or parental opposition. Karnataka High Court.

  • 22-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A partition decree obtained by natural legal heirs cannot be reopened or remanded at the instance of a third party claiming under a Will, unless that claimant establishes a strong prima facie legal right through the strict proof of the Will’s execution and attestation. In the absence of such proof, the court will not interfere with the settled rights of the natural heirs. Karnataka High Court.

  • 21-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. When a recovery certificate is issued by the RERA under Section 40 the designated revenue authorities have a mandatory statutory obligation to execute said certificate and recover the dues as arrears of land revenue. The Court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the recovery within a specified timeframe. Karnataka High Court.

  • 21-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Suit for declaration. A mere misdescription of a property, such as a wrong survey number in a title deed or a compromise decree, will not vitiate a transaction or negate ownership if the identity of the property is otherwise established by the evidence on record, including boundaries and the clear intent of the parties. Karnataka High Court.

  • 21-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Even if a contract specifies a multi-member arbitrators panel, the Court may appoint a sole arbitrator if the parties have, through their conduct or consensus, waived the requirement for a panel, or if the facts of the case necessitate a sole arbitrator for the interests of justice and efficiency. Karnataka High Court.

  • 21-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Where the agreement to sell entered into by the parties clearly states that from the date mentioned in the agreement, the tenant in possession of the property intended to be sold under the agreement shall not be liable to pay any rent, it would imply a surrender of rights as a tenant and the estate vests with the owner. Supreme Court.

  • 21-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A tenant cannot withhold possession of the subject property till the security deposit is refunded. The remedy available to the tenant is to sue the landlord for refund of the security deposit after handing over possession. Karnataka High Court.

  • 20-January-2026
  • Daksha Legal