• 

  SARFAESI Act vis-à-vis Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act. A valid and duly registered security interest under the SARFAESI Act has priority over claims and attachments under the BUDS Act. Subsequent proceedings under the BUDS Act cannot defeat such prior security, though any surplus remaining after satisfaction of the secured debt shall be available for the depositors’ claims. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1345.

  • 08-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. Damages awarded for use and occupation by a tenant holding over do not constitute ‘’mesne profits’’ under Section 2(12) CPC; consequently, no additional court fee can be demanded under Section 42 of the Act. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar.1357.

  • 06-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Commercial Courts Act – Section 12A. Mere prayer for urgent interim relief does not dispense with mandatory pre-institution mediation. The Court must examine the plaint to ascertain whether genuine urgency existed at the time of institution. An ex parte order dispensing with mediation does not bar the defendant from subsequently seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1426

  • 05-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  The death of a cheque’s drawer before its presentation terminates the mandate to the bank but does not extinguish a civil debt incurred during his lifetime, which may be enforced against his legal representatives to the extent of the inherited estate. Plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 merely because the cheque was presented after the drawer’s death. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1341

  • 05-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  ‘’No parent is a mere visitor in the child’s life’’. In child custody cases the term ’parenting time’ should replace ‘visitation’ for a non-custodial parent. The expression better recognises the continuing parental relationship and provides a more humane approach to child custody. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1338

  • 05-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A bank receiving a cheque for collection acts as the customer’s agent and must exercise due diligence in presenting it within its validity period. Unexplained failure resulting in the cheque becoming stale constitutes negligence and deficiency in service under consumer protection law. Supreme Court.

  • 05-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Commercial Courts Act – Writ Jurisdiction. An order dismissing the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint would not be amenable to an appeal under Section 13(1A) and can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 701

  • 03-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Where a claim for price adjustment/escalation is governed by contractual formulae, failure to prove the relevant parameters, calculations and supporting documents justifies rejection of the claim, notwithstanding the existence of a contractual right to price adjustment. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Criminal Law. Where a case and counter-case arise out of the same incident, they cannot be investigated separately by different Investigating Officers. Karnataka High Court quashes the investigations and directs de novo investigation of both cases by the same Investigating Officer.

  • 03-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Rejection of Plaint. A defendant who fails to invoke Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot seek rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the ground of an arbitration clause. Karnataka High Court.

  • 02-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Natural Justice – Opportunity of Hearing. Natural justice does not invariably require a separate opportunity to file written submissions or an express consideration of every argument; it is sufficient if the affected party is afforded a real and effective opportunity to present its case. Karnataka High Court.

  • 02-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Triple riding on a motorcycle in violation of Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act does not, by itself, constitute contributory negligence to absolve the Insurance Company unless it is established that such triple riding contributed either to the occurrence of the accident or to the extent of the injuries sustained by the victim. Karnataka High Court.

  • 02-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal