Hon’ble Mr. Justice C M Poonacha celebrates his 51st birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice C M Poonacha: Born on 06th April 1974. Completed Law from University Law College, Bangalore and enrolled as an Advocate in October 1997.
Joined the chambers of Sri. S.K.V. Chalapathy, Senior Advocate and later his father Sri C. M. Monnappa, Advocate. Co-founded a law firm ‘Lexplexus’ in August 2001. Handled various matters before the District Courts, High Court of Karnataka and Supreme Court of India as well as before various Forums and Tribunals as also numerous Arbitration matters.
Represented various Government Entities, Banks, Insurance Companies and other institutions apart from private clientele. Empanelled with the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, High Court of Karnataka since 2015.
Appointed as Addl. Government Advocate, High Court of Karnataka in August 2020.
Appointed as Additional Judge, High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 13.06.2022.
| Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice C M Poonacha. Alienation of the re-granted ‘Service Inam Land’ from the period 1:2:1963 to 7:8:1978 is valid and permission for sale is only a formality since the Deputy Commissioner is bound to give permission. Karnataka High Court reiterates. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BJgIIOisX5GEQJ1VIQOeB6Lrz Industrial Disputes Act. Employer is not liable to pay Provident Fund contribution in respect of Section 17B wages to employee. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3COZkcdReu0NDtwgSvCvkIbML Stay of execution proceedings under Order 21 Rule 29 during pendency of suit does not apply when the suit if filed after initiation of the execution proceedings. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HWF0i0p1kk3zLISSyCTqYGLoD Sale deed executed in violation of an order of injunction passed by a competent Court is unlawful under Section 23 of the Contract Act and the purchaser cannot claim any right or equity under the sale transaction. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Q2uw7IaSqdK2fROn3UZm2nTPK Employer is not liable to deposit provident fund contribution in respect of payments made in compliance of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/TrhlKYgo7OlRXOTg2KLIvx3z4 Industrial Disputes Act. Proportionality of the punishment cannot be gone into by the Tribunal while considering the application of the employer under Section 33(2)(b). Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/m3QivhoPb5fMOM1GDS7ga076n Suit for recovery of arrears of rent. Landlord cannot claim enhanced rent under the lease deed which requires registration but not registered. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/xGqk3fpNUCBvYIlc7mWRGn7vK Provision regarding regulation of erection of buildings under the Panchayat Raj Act does apply to erection of mere compound wall. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Vx2kofaKE8FZeeNHlm8fnY5v6 Sufficiency of cause for wife to live separately from husband cannot be gone into in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Negligence or refusal by husband to maintain is sufficient. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0LVZn0rgkUrSMQYO99nrs00qH Execution of decree. If objector claims through Judgment Debtor, the application is to be rejected. If the claim is based on an independent right, such an application shall be enquired into. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aYtutQ3CiGIDjIKd7NV2KwVu8 Remand of the entire suit for fresh trial when the first appellate Court records a finding that the decree was a collusive one and material facts having been suppressed, is permissible. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/oCG2NsjzPTMZaHESSuN45jI9c Civil Procedure Code. Summons served on wife of defendant is sufficient service. Presumption arises that the defendant had knowledge of the suit and the date of hearing mentioned in the summons. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2bQvHCIEhHcWq7VD0L5G4qhkg The only relevant issue in a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act is prior possession and illegal dispossession therefrom. Title to the property is irrelevant. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JV707aPMuxGJMz83tvQSrn1Sx Withdrawal of suit without liberty to institute a fresh suit as contemplated under sub-rule (3) of Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC operates as res judicata for fresh suit on the same cause of action. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8RtfFt0Dnj8imnjO3wrEchf8E Question of limitation in a suit for partition arises only if defendants prove ouster of plaintiff from the joint family properties. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eKWE0e5fGBDeR6MKN58wlVCmv Suit for partition. When one co-sharer is in possession of the properties, all other co-sharers are presumed to be in possession on the basis of joint title. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/n2oo8U8EiWNNe1AIDzGXYYxlz Executing court can go into validity of claim based on Will in final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2ESKgcXmB5uqD4jX89L1vBS4r Execution Court must consider whether a portion of the property is sufficient to satisfy the decree. Failure amounts to ‘substantial injury’ within the meaning of Order 21 Rule 90. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fTdXMOBVJ3t1dzRBIG3wVNItJ Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Once the calendar of events is published, the District Election Office loses jurisdiction and cannot order postponement of the elections. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BGMonYvoHhixtQHdWJIB2AX3v If majority of members of a Co-operative Society resign thus bringing strength below the quorum, then all other members shall be deemed to have vacated their office and fresh election shall be held to all the posts. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/n5eZNsiFHG0kOOV4bacNcTlku “Land acquisition for public purpose. Procedural defects which do not go to the root of the matter should not be permitted to defeat a just cause’’. Karnataka High Court while upholding land acquisition by the BDA. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qcpe4j5ctWMt2jSgFgXvc9WI9 Employers Compensation Act is a beneficial Legislation which requires liberal interpretation. Liability of the insurer cannot be limited to the actual wages paid by the employer. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4EJBeuBU6azCVJrUivOh7X4eA MV Act. Tribunal cannot simply rely on the pleadings by claimant about his income while applying Section 163A. Tribunal can independently assess the income to give benefit of the section. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/nA3rvcSTTM9nispZdM4xlejao Payment of Gratuity Act. Impleading principal instead of the management in claim before the Controlling Authority will not vitiate the proceedings. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LAA4R4kciq3iVNGwQx8X1zUE0 Independent suit to set aside compromise decree is maintainable by a person who was not a party to the compromise decree. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eVP2Ip56VZ52xXPMWxIfwEJ9G Decree of mere declaration of title granted by trial court cannot be set aside when the plaintiffs had sought for other consequential reliefs also in their suit. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kwBUhhl9ZriyTHFEkPyPfB2wj Commercial Courts Act. Suit for ejection in respect of a commercial premises with prayer for award of mesne profit falls within the jurisdiction of commercial court under Section 2(1)(c)(vii). Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f75d08107da93c900c1f8800 Guardians and Wards Act. The custody of a minor child should be with the natural parents unless they are found unfit. While the child’s preference is a factor, the paramount consideration is their long-term welfare, emotional stability, financial security, and sibling bonding. Prior custody agreements can be revised based on changing circumstances. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/959e36a536bc750d75504b04 A compromise decree that excludes legal heirs is not binding on them. Courts have the power to grant partition instead of mere declaration when justified by the facts of the case. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/47f2101efa21af1a6b2be015 Hindu Law. Purchaser of a coparcenary share does not acquire title to any defined share in the property and is not entitled to joint possession. He can work out his rights only by a suit for partition and his right to possession would date from the date when a specific allotment is made in his favour. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/bc546255edc056252d6e8c45 Pursuant to the amendment introducing Rule 3A to Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Code, appeals against orders recording a compromise, as well as suits challenging the validity of a compromise, are no longer maintainable. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/69f29147e8db3d724262509f Civil Procedure Code. A party can file a counterclaim until the stage of framing of issues, but the court’s permission to do so cannot be granted thereafter. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/498cecf7632b16734b9429bc Arbitration and Conciliation Act. District Court in a suit filed under Section 34 of the Act has only power either to confirm the order passed by the Arbitrator or set aside the order and remand the matter to the Arbitrator. The award cannot be modified. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/39f691724a3fb9eb52c77063 Section 92 of the CPC is for the purpose of proper administration of a trust and deals with its internal management. Suit filed against the third parties does not come within the purview of Section 92. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0c1ea0b9521738c93499b7a7 Indian Succession Act. Individuals not party to probate proceedings must seek revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Act, rather than filing an appeal against the probate order. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fe0a0914e1f00bbeea860f22 An officer in-charge of a superior post is empowered to perform all functions, including statutory powers, and not merely routine administrative tasks. ARCS in charge of DRCS post can exercise all powers under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d907159a8def31b1cbaf2efe Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act. Certificate of award issued by the Registrar or his authorized representative is equivalent to a decree of a Civil Court and may be executed before the Civil Court accordingly. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/59d8ba11c7b7f7d545f68438 Notwithstanding its classification as agricultural land in official records, the market value of land situated within the municipal limits of a city corporation shall be taken into account for the purpose of determining court fees. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/9a45e08f99a55727c6f24d69 When defendant raises a genuine dispute regarding title, thereby casting a cloud on the plaintiff’s title, the plaintiff cannot pursue a suit for mere injunction either preventive or mandatory. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/a897b8abc6583e37369e4882 Service Law. Corruption cases warrant severe penalties. Tribunal cannot replace dismissal order with compulsory retirement solely based on sympathy. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2c1593a413e1217938a743d0 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Even statutory dues owed to Government get extinguished if such claims are not part of the insolvency resolution plan. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cea77091cc00764e2c952eea Questions to be determined by the Court executing decree. Section 47 of the CPC cannot be resorted in a proceeding to execute an arbitral award. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/coFSrD6AZveZvirAhyVElQuKh Expiry of arbitration mandate. For the purpose of calculating the period of twelve months, time during which arbitration proceedings were stayed by the Court has to be excluded. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/29i49SJKjVOkG6dn1YgMyhdsY Expiry of the arbitration. When parties file claim, defence, counter-claim, rejoinder and surrejoinder, the last of the pleadings shall be taken as the starting point to calculate twelve months. Karnataka High Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/arjSdobZkbkuuEln46hf2GErH Civil Procedure Code. Order 8 Rule 6-A CPC. Counter claim can be filed even after filing the written statement. Restriction is only with respect to the accrual of the cause of action. Supreme Court. https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sngFr0blfKMr6yaOdftGR97Rb |
Daksha Legal 