Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum celebrates his 52nd birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum:
Born on 05.05.1972. Graduated LL.B. at R.L. Law College, Belagavi. Enrolled as an Advocate on 31.10.1998. Practiced at Chikodi from 1998 to 2001.
From 03/07/2001 to June 2008 practiced at High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, in the field of Civil, Criminal and Constitutional Matters. After establishment of Circuit Bench at Dharwad shifted practice to High Court of Karnataka, Bench at Dharwad. Appeared before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and other Tribunals, and also before Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and stood as Standing Counsel for National Highways Authority of India and Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubbali.
Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 23.09.2019 and Permanent Judge on 01.03.2021.
Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum.
Karnataka Police Act. Failure to provide reasonable opportunity to the person sought to be removed from the local limits of his jurisdiction renders the order illegal. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WfrOF59GJQYQgVKtXnjvQx6f1
Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act. Failure to implement the scheme substantially within five years and shifting of the scheme to other land results in lapsing of the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Hb5AwXnGI91P2CM0SLMFoJEcp
Educational qualification cannot be insisted for transfer of authorization of licence on compassionate ground Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZpFclsXiu5nwoYud3lPNvGBW
Landowner is entitled to additional interest on the compensation when dispossessed from the property before the initiation of the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/boNDIz5Fkelkepz8XjO1teZ20
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. In an appeal under Section 5A of the Act by the grantee, Deputy Commissioner can NOT stay mutation entry in the name of subsequent purchaser. Remedy is only under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZORKi3wBXAlfBwhOHhkxZFCYT
C.P.C. Execution. Person who claims under a Will and seeks declaration of title and possession can NOT maintain application under Order 21 Rule 97 as obstructer. He has to file separate suit for declaration and possession. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/W1BX2nBw58m4Lc4Co8Sc2dNoq
Suit for possession based on title without seeking declaration of ownership is maintainable when the defendant does not assert the title to himself. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/bwOUYiHYqq2Zc4wlmsFQFhc8s
Suit against public trust. Court cannot entertain application seeking appointment of receiver by deferring the application seeking leave to prosecute the suit under Section 92 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/99kJJbmjcpeU6HZvF6QdO95nl
Acceptance of lesser share by father in ancestral properties in family partition will not prevent his son from claiming actual/correct share in the properties. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lH8UX2ApuNy7StVQeKgv4g366
Decree holder can decide in which of the several modes mentioned in Section 51 of the Civil Procedure Code, he will execute his decree. The judgment debtor cannot invoke the Section. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GgSR0z6iSSTq78PsYqzvYWWvS
Mere amendment to plaint adding properties describing them as joint family properties will not cause hardship since the nature of the properties need to be substantiated during the trial. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ON3MWU8ICHwXx6Qzg5x6VzKNb
Where property is sold under the Partition Act 1893, provisions of Order 21 Rules 84 & 85 CPC regarding mandatory deposit of entire balance sale price within 15 days do not apply. Court can extend time for such payment. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ftBEuUrvqx3sHe2V7cFsYvxKY
When a cross objection is not maintainable independently, then there is no question of maintaining two separate order sheets as per Rule 155 of the Civil Rules of Practice. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dcje4BfRHhnQXqCEbr8pKokg6
In a suit for partition, defendant can seek direction to plaintiff to include certain properties in the plaint schedule and seek partition of the same. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ILh8GtkO4hA7IEoFpjKnVRvuI
Non-binding arbitration agreement with an option to litigate further if the parties do not resolve the disputes pursuant to such non-binding arbitration cannot be termed an arbitration agreement. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/00Rg07Jw5jZ5AnDf2lG2sCy7l
Advocate representing a party has a right to be physically present in a Remote Point when the evidence of his client is being recorded. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Jy4rDr9s2lZSwMbMYr8q4dFrE
Court exercising revisional power under Section 115 Civil Procedure Code can admit additional evidence/document. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d5F5onkN7FiWSetM3ATFQU4Uc
Question of violation of building bye-laws or plan etc are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the planning authorities. Civil Court cannot try these aspects in a civil suit. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/up5BlwOF1ERz3PCnYpPDBRUbG
SARFAESI Act. Even person other than principal borrower, like tenant, can challenge the order passed under Section 14 only before the competent Tribunal. Writ petition is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wvlbkDcWQyw7x6uZyCECmWLXs
”Courts are under an obligation to follow religious text and old practices in religious disputes so long as they do not violateconstitutional rights of an individual”. Karnataka High Court while approving Bala Sanyasa.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/YcnhMaQFG6CVLFKHCK8Zab4Kh
”On account of expansion of public interest litigation, we are witnessing frivolous litigations and increasing instances of abuse of public interest litigation.” Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BNG5fqTj2q7KB2rBeyvwzTqYS
Guns are part of martial race Kodavas. Exemption of Kodavas under the Arms Act is a reasonable classification. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Di8lHzPxDofJYu0sZOVUXXLuo
Privatisation of Airports. Policy decision of the executive are best left to it and a Court should not interfere with the policy decision unless the decision of the authority is mala fide, arbitrary, irrational or unreasonable. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/zEbsCgl9aoHhnNfo9RNKj6dQC
‘Planting trees on a barren Government land is not a crime. Afforestation is an essential tool to deal with global warming’. Karnataka High Court
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Lq1wZ1Mm7zcjgcwj0KBwljt5B
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. If the grantee converts the granted land for non agricultural purposes, it is no more a ‘granted land under the Act’ and hence prior permission to sell is NOT necessary. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6RtC2rw9UbeawCXsJfwnGZFcu
Karnataka SC-ST (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 is NOT applicable if the granted land is converted by the grantee to non-agricultural purposes under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NMiN2CZSZ8JdZCAd2i2uxenk9
Evidence Act and Karnataka Stamp Act. Even a photocopy-xerox copy of the original document can be impounded and deficit stamp duty can be collected by the Court if the same is produced after laying proper foundation. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6lstfgUodgBAVzDmHaQsFsrxN
Land acquisition. Kharab lands falling under category ‘A’ of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules belong to landowners and not to Government. Landowners are entitled to compensation. Karnataka High Court reiterates.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cA82Orf6qOpoXE6tmoYtZiv8w
C.P.C. Order 39 Rules 1 and 2. Grant of temporary injunction restraining usage of confidential information of plaintiff by defendant. Principles summarised. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/T1TxfItq0N90hp2Ro0DGRwmke
Mareva Injunction. Court can grant mareva injunction where recovery of amounts outstanding is a long drawnprocess and transfer of assets by defendant defeats the claim of the plaintiff. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kNN4tUaMUDx1bDzYZy8rYFrmC
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Award rejecting claim if found to be illegal fresh award cannot be made by Court under Section 34. Only option is to set aside award and leave parties to resume Arbitration once again. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qUFbIxtepWCxHWeCMg61OZwwx
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Application under Section 9 is maintainable even after conclusion of arbitral proceedings and during Section 34 proceedings only in so far as the claim granted by the arbitrator. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OAEKztRfhK7ZhoijVje4Lduvh
CPC. Attachment before judgment is a drastic power which should NOT be exercised mechanically to convert unsecured debt into a secured debt. Prima facie case and the chance of suit being decreed are relevant. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VVRqjCkCocseG0gLmnDiGaC5w
Hindu Succession Act. Amended Section 6. Plea of prior partition. Mere partition decree will not sever joint family status. Until final decree is passed and allottees of shares are put in possession – there is no partition. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cVSv4aF0KiIjrAxeB849GREtT
Contempt of Courts Act. High Court has no power to take cognizance of contempt of Appellate Tribunal since the Tribunal is not court subordinate to High Court. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4IrxfFssRPHNrHC094siXPldn
Specific Relief Act. Bar under Section 22 against grant prayer not sought for does not curtail power of the appellate Order XLI Rule 33 CPC. Court can refund of sale consideration even in the absence of prayer. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KOcjJTBvmF5QZZ8EhyMj545yC
Income Tax Act. Section 147. Mere change of opinion on consideration of the same material is not a ground to reopen the assessment. Full Bench Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7sTlzX2KidKjHLINVfe3QDMBR
A member of the Bar is expected to act first as an Officer of the Court and thereafter as the mouthpiece of his client. Karnataka High Court censures lawyer for filing contemptuous petition.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fzAXguziZ8tux8PINupTNoBcQ
Karnataka High Court follows 1948 Privy Council judgment on boundary dispute. The judgment has become Locus Classicus even after seven decades.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MFsneyllF43iQKNdYSHvkQUMA
CPC. Attachment before judgment is a drastic power which should NOT be exercised mechanically to convert unsecured debt into a secured debt. Prima facie case and the chance of suit being decreed are relevant. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VVRqjCkCocseG0gLmnDiGaC5w
C.P.C. Order 39 Rules 1 and 2. Grant of temporary injunction restraining usage of confidential information of plaintiff by defendant. Principles summarised. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/T1TxfItq0N90hp2Ro0DGRwmke
Land acquisition for Urban Development Authorities. Prolonged delay in issuing final notification after preliminary notification amounts to abandonment of acquisition. Landowner can utilize the lands in accordance with law. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Rur2eEXZMG7yKzmsosROngM24
Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act 1978. ‘Granted land’ (original grant to SC-ST persons) includes house sites or non-agricultural land also. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3BcHZkmwX69KaHWO4KiWoYnQq
Karnataka SC-ST (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 is NOT applicable if the granted land is converted by the grantee to non-agricultural purposes under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NMiN2CZSZ8JdZCAd2i2uxenk9
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. If the grantee converts the granted land for non agricultural purposes, it is no more a ‘granted land under the Act’ and hence prior permission to sell is NOT necessary. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6RtC2rw9UbeawCXsJfwnGZFcu
Second wife whose marriage was valid before coming into operation of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is entitled to inherit the properties of her husband in terms of Section 10. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JWlucYlUexqrOgM74TekW0YVl
Resjudicata applies even to wrong decisions. Judgment which has attained finality intra-parties cannot be re-opened simply because the legal position is altered in another subsequent judgment. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rJNRYO3LGAR11cAOqq3X6O92s
Civic Amenity sites cannot be sold since they play a crucial role in shaping the quality of life within urban areas. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/vSIfaa33mPSKvrhwmIOqB5uZq
An arbitral award cannot be really treated as an instrument under the Stamp Act. Executing Court cannot impound the decree or levy penalty. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/r7Ts3JWbODVZSAcb2yIg7w644
Married daughters constitute independent unit for the purpose of determining excess land under Section 63(4) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uDcnCWRbj5gbNuMcJ2NOXAT0g
Land Acquisition Act. If an application is filed to refer dispute to civil court, the authority concerned cannot refuse to make a reference under Section 30. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2hUNkElgBu3FmrMPdt9xGHWLR
When there is a doubt as to whether an unregistered document is partition deed or relinquishment deed, it can be adjudicated only during the trial. Trial Court cannot refuse to accept it in evidence by conducting a mini trial. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/hL2lFEsRmdTNXpHxndLZDJySO
A registered partition acts as complete disruption of the joint family status. Son born subsequent to the partition cannot seek reopening of the partition unless the partition was within his own family. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/QKLSyVmASOGJcRlSDxp2rIiBp
Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. Parties governed by the Bombay School of law though residing in Karnataka can adopt a person who has attained the age of majority. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ImVc0fanCOEFXoikEK8B5x1RK
Right of a daughter under Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act is not affected by alienation after death of father and before amendment to Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KyaWBh1rYAonKR25IUBQEh8tj
Suit for specific performance in respect of Inam land. Non-alienation clause in the grant order is not a relevant question while examining the controversy between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/H506glYMsQDGBfaK8bqTVFmhf
Suit for specific performance. Even when possession was delivered prior to agreement of sale, the agreement shall be treated as the one coupled with possession and the stamp duty shall be paid accordingly. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6gqHYEeBge9ibOJH29AVVgz8L
”We must import a little commonsense into notices of this kind.” Statutory notice akin to Section 80 CPC is not mandatory to make counter claim in a civil suit filed by the statutory body. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/CwxWOih0fdjqiqKOiLnetfM95
Registered general power of attorney coupled with interest cannot be cancelled by registration of another document titled ‘’Cancellation of GPA’’. The remedy is only under the Specific Relief Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JYnMSXFNSocuyfqw29iGUCyh4
Mere speculation about hidden artifacts or historical monuments is not a ground to acquire land without following the procedure under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/iBr85Inf0NcBYxsMpgokotYEw
Award passed by the Lok Adalath cannot be questioned by a separate suit though termed as suit for partition in view of the bar under the Legal Services Authority Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rZGdWNwkc6KxmE0m2T0kLer8X
Adopted son becomes a coparcener of in the family to which he is adopted. Karta has no right to bequeath ancestral property by Will after adopting the son. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uLYJye4ND0KsJYSgqd2pkjJ8a
High Tension electricity lines over agricultural lands will not completely deprive landowners of utilizing their lands to carry out agricultural operations. Diminutive value of the land at 30% is just and reasonable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/yJFPeagsEacshJnWT40K3Xs3v
Madras School of Hindu Law. Mother or widow of a propositus cannot independently claim share in the coparceneary properties and are entitled only to notional share after his death. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/A2Beb2CICYgowHGdGMoKRwjSB
Third party applicant approaching execution court under Order 97 Rule XXI of CPC should possess an independent title which is superior to that of the decree holders. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7GlvaXbM7XiqhN86tIE6S8yxy
Execution proceedings in suit for partition. Person claiming under joint family member who suffered decree cannot maintain application Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/07jntkBSQJI6V41hiJtrB27va
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Vesting in the State Government of land leased contrary to the Act. Tahsildar can exercise power under Section 58 only if the lease is created after coming into force of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/SJIjvKqKxdsEqO4gANB1KY1hd
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Deputy Commissioner cannot hold roving enquiry and nullify the registered documents in the guise of exercising suo motu revisional jurisdiction under Section 136(3). Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/tXamaWcJjFVGmFWts4GwDYYGm
Daughters cannot maintain suit for partition in respect of joint family properties when the succession had opened prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/UhrVNE0e9S9IrdiOabn9MeayE
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. Planning Authority cannot reject modification of layout plan unless the modification contravenes any provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qOFu43kS1CsR3M7iJU9uwCCaw
Municipal Corporation is bound to manage, control and protect Civic Amenity sites vested in it on execution of release deed by the layout owner. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OAKslY6sfNyUfJfnoNmxOytRX
CGST Act. Appeal under Section 107. When the entire tax liability is disputed, there is no requirement of depositing admitted amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MVH41lfue0fASLoKOJAU5j2ge
Amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. If daughter is not alive when 2005 amendment to Hindu Succession Act was passed, her legal heirs can seek her share in the ancestral property. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aS2WykLXBeBrnJgZ055tugWRX
Land Acquisition. Pot Kharab is not a government land and it belongs to the ownership of the landowner under the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. Compensation is payable even in respect of such land. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/blOzfzPMYV4e9hFoKWQ0hS2GZ
Change of land use from residential to commercial can be granted under Section 14 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. Authorities are bound to consider the representation from the owner. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/DMrXwrwG8aTMqE7l3MIuPpHuY
Application for conversion of lands for non-agricultural purposes cannot be rejected on the ground that there is proposal to include the lands in the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/hk4bjkcTswQrXakw4DNckureq
Court cannot straightaway dismiss a suit for non-joinder of necessary party to the suit. Proper course of action is to adjourn the suit and direct the plaintiff to add the necessary party. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/AsOTArjSOvrkvo6JRQL7m235B
Children cannot seek partition of properties received by their father from the grandfather under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act during his lifetime. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/vbPTyhShqLT9dxeJYo1RkvL7a
Civil Procedure Code. Disputed questions cannot be taken into consideration or decided while considering an application under Order 7 Rule 11. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MLUcoucqO4Z2p2hVepbjF3i5P
Scheme formed by Bank denying compassionate appointment to married daughter of a deceased employee cannot be termed as discriminatory or violative of Article 15 of the Constitution. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7SEAtQMsVtBRjn1IapoRaDNHq
Service Law. Husband undergoing vasectomy as a condition for availing maternity leave by wife applies even in cases where the husband undergoes tubectomy. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/XrElN8QCrChshTMka6ah8jR8j
A litigant cannot assert title based on entries in the revenue records and mere entry in the revenue records will not constitute an act of adverse possession. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LPOoyvSEER1v19VVoZuLTtT3m
Though Civil Court has no jurisdiction to declare caste of a person, it has jurisdiction to direct correction of entry in school records as per the Caste Certificate. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/yV793EDG5Z1XzSx6qLoO6tKid
Son/daughter born to second wife/void marriage are also entitled to seek employment on compassionate grounds. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Mp9QvVrpelM5vJKETyOcpWgYq
Governing Council of a University cannot make recommendation to the Disciplinary Authority/Registrar in the matter of imposition of penalty to the employees. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/q5mJv5j5Y2Mal6HQA1qyGDUle
Daksha Legal 