Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar celebrates his 56th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar: Born on 07.05.1970. Graduated LL.B. at University Law College, Bangalore. Enrolled as an Advocate on 29.08.1992.
From 1992 to till date – Practiced as an Advocate in the High Court of Karnataka as well as Civil Courts, Criminal Courts and Tribunals.
Practiced on all types of Civil Cases, Criminal Cases, Writ Petitions/Appeals, Arbitration Cases, Company Cases, Motor Vehicle Cases, Matrimonial Cases and Consumer Disputes.
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 Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice S R Krishna Kumar.
Right of Persons with Disabilities Act. Visually impaired person cannot be driven to common law remedy when the offence committed against him attracts the RPD Act. Karnataka High Court.
Stay of execution pending suit between decree holder and judgement debtor. Order 21 Rule 29 CPC will not apply to suits which are instituted subsequent to institution of the execution proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Property of grandfather directly inherited by grandson, when his father had predeceased the grandfather, becomes the self-acquired property of the grandson. Karnataka High Court.
Trademarks of Company in liquidation are custodia legis of the Company Court. Only the Company Court can determine the ownership of the mark and declare any disposition as void. Karnataka High Court.
Order under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is invalid if the same is issued after three years of relevant assessment year and the amount escaped from tax is below Rs. 50 lakhs. Karnataka High Court.
Social impact assessment prior to issuance of preliminary notification under the 2013 land acquisition Act must be by mandatory publication of the notification in the official gazette. Else the acquisition proceedings becomes illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Land-owners whose lands were acquired for KIADB after 1 January 2014 are entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Karnataka High Court.
No income tax can be levied or deductible on compensation for acquiring lands under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act in view of 2013 land acquisition Act. Karnataka High Court.
Determining CET rankings of 2021-22 batch students by taking only CET marks is illegal. Karnataka High Court orders fresh ranking for admission to Engineering and Technology courses for the academic year 2022-23 by taking both PUC and CET marks.
Provisional release of perishable goods under the Customs Act is permissible even during pendency of appeal and not confined to proceedings pending before the adjudicating officer. Karnataka High Court.
Production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27, CPC cannot be as a matter of right. Party must explain why evidence could not be produced in trial court despite due diligence. Karnataka High Court.
Post-acquisition allottee has no locus standi to challenge de-notification of lands under acquisition relying on the doctrine of promissory estoppel. Karnataka High Court.
Interpretation of statutes. Proviso to a provision cannot control the main provision nor be interpreted in a manner which renders the main provision nugatory or otiose. Karnataka High Court.
“Right to nutritious food is a fundamental right of pregnant woman, lactating mothers and children’’. Karnataka High Court directs the State Govt to implement ICDS without further delay and to submit compliance report.
No party should suffer due to the act of court. Right accrued as on the date of writ petition cannot be taken away by amendment inserted during the pendency of the petition. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration & Conciliation Act. Even when limitation period to challenge arbitral award under Section 34 expired during closure/vacation of Courts, provisions of Section 4 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked by the applicant. Karnataka High Court.
Non-impleadment of particular Department in Writ Petition is not a ground for the State Government not to comply with Court order. Karnataka High Court suggests appointment of Nodal Coordinating Officer.
”Honour power purchase agreements and make prompt, regular and timely payments to power generators without any delay”. Karnataka High Court directs ESCOMs while holding writ petitions maintainable to enforce PPAs.
”Urban planning is a valuable force to achieve sustainable development.”. Karnataka High Court upholds land acquisition for Dr.K.Shivaram Karanth Layout.
”Purchase of land by Karnataka Housing body without mandatory prior approval of State Government is void”. Karnataka High Court cancels sale deed and restores land to the owner.
Child custody. Non-custodial parent is entitled to equal number of days as with the custodial parent during holidays, festivals, birthdays and other important family functions. Karnataka High Court issues guidelines.
Registration of sale deed in the State of Karnataka. Sub-registrars can NOT insist on production of ’11E’ sketch for registration. Govt website to be updated accordingly. Karnataka High Court.
Civil Procedure Code. Order 39 Rules 1 and 2. Trial court has to apply its mind while granting ex-parte injunction. Passing cryptic, bald, laconic, unreasoned and non-speaking order is impermissible. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Waiver of ineligibility of arbitrator under Section 12. In the absence of an express agreement between parties claim cannot be barred by principles of waiver acquiescence and estoppel. Karnataka High Court.
Creating posts having trappings of the Ministers to overcome the upper ceiling limit under Article 164 1-A is ultra vires the constitutional mandate. Karnataka High Court.
Non-impleadment of particular Department in Writ Petition is not a ground for the State Government not to comply with Court order. Karnataka High Court suggests appointment of Nodal Coordinating Officer.
Karnataka High Court applies the test of ‘manifest arbitrariness’ to strike down the Rule which whittled down GST refund of input taxes paid in the course of zero-rated supply and export.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7lw14pngRyZRYxZQNa1XfAUY3“Betting and Gambling” under the CGST Act do not include Online/Electronic/Digital Rummy & Digital games which are games of skills. Karnataka High Court.
Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 does not disallow common credit taken for manufacture of sugar even after 2015 amendment as bagasse is not a manufactured product. Karnataka High Court.
Post-acquisition allottee has no locus standi to challenge de-notification of lands under acquisition relying on the doctrine of promissory estoppel. Karnataka High Court.
Land-owners whose lands were acquired for KIADB after 1 January 2014 are entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Karnataka High Court.
Social impact assessment prior to issuance of preliminary notification under the 2013 land acquisition Act must be by mandatory publication of the notification in the official gazette. Else the acquisition proceedings becomes illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Trademarks of Company in liquidation are custodia legis of the Company Court. Only the Company Court can determine the ownership of the mark and declare any disposition as void. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. Suit for cancellation of sale deed. No need to pay ad-valorem court fee on the market value if the property is agricultural land. Karnataka High Court.
Application under Order 21 Rule 29 CPC seeking stay of execution proceedings on the ground that the suit is instituted by the Judgment Debtor is maintainable only if the suit was instituted prior to filing of the execution petition. Karnataka High Court.
Expenditure incurred by assessee towards construction of houses for flood victims as per of the Government directions is liable for deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. Karnataka High Court.
Temple cannot be considered as a Civic Amenity area under the Bangalore Development Authority Act. Karnataka High Court.
When the portion left in the layout plan for Ring Road, National Highway or Peripheral Road is not utilised for the said purpose and is diverted for other purpose, the landowner is entitled for TDR compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Education Act. Mere change in the composition of the Governing Council or its members from time to time would not tantamount to change in the Governing Council. Karnataka High Court.
When educational institution is run on a property designated for educational purposes under the Master Plan and the zoning regulations, there is no requirement for conversion of the property specifically for educational purposes. Karnataka High Court.
Planning Authority cannot refuse ‘No Objection Certificate’ for establishing petrol bunk on the ground that the land is not converted for non-agricultural purposes. Karnataka High Court.
Execution proceedings. Amendment of pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 CPC applies to objector/obstructor application under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. Jurisdiction of the trial Court in relation to grant of Succession Certificate is in relation to place where the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death or where his movable properties are situated. Karnataka High Court.
Commercial Court is bound to order refund of the entire court fee when the matter is settled out of Court before recording evidence on the merits of the claim. Karnataka High Court.
When there is no recital in sale agreement that possession of property is handed over to purchaser, Court cannot direct the party to pay stamp duty and penalty as per conveyance. Karnataka High Court.
Property of grandfather directly inherited by grandson, when his father had predeceased the grandfather, becomes the self-acquired property of the grandson. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipalities Act. Advance notice to Municipality is not required in a suit for permanent injunction if the very object of filing the suit is defeated by delay. Karnataka High Court.
Principle of ‘’Boundaries prevail over Measurements’’ would not apply when the measurement/extent given in the document is clear, definite, specific, unambiguous and certain. Karnataka High Court.
Contract Act. Section 65. Vendor cannot refuse to refund advance amount to the purchaser on the ground that the sale agreement itself was void or illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for injunction without disclosing identity of the property as required under Order 7 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for ejection. Once the defendants admit landlord-tenant relationship vis-à-vis the plaintiff, they cannot question title of the plaintiff over the tenanted property. Karnataka High Court.
Co-operative banks can recover money either under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, or under the SARFAESI Act. Their remedy cannot be restricted to SARFAESI Act. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. Stamp duty classification must be based on the express terms of the document and not on assumptions. A document cannot be classified as a ‘’sale agreement’’ unless it meets statutory requirements. Karnataka High Court.
A compromise decree operates as a contract between parties superimposed with judicial approval and can only be set aside if fraud, misrepresentation, or undue influence is proven. Further, a separate suit challenging a compromise decree is not maintainable under Order 23 Rule 3A CPC. The only remedy available is to approach the court that recorded the compromise decree. Karnataka High Court.
Non-payment of the entire sale consideration does not render a registered sale deed invalid, as title transfers upon execution and registration. The appropriate remedy in such cases is to seek recovery of the unpaid amount rather than cancellation of the sale deed. Karnataka High Court.
A registered sale deed cannot be declared null and void merely on allegations of fraud and coercion unless cogent evidence is presented. The burden of proof lies on the party asserting fraud. Karnataka High Court.
Development authority cannot refuse to implement resolutions dropping land acquisition if possession wasn’t taken. Section 48 of Land Acquisition Act and Section 21 of General Clauses Act allow withdrawal/rescission of acquisition if original owners retain possession. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Partition can take place only among persons having pre-existing right over property. Third party claiming right under an unregistered power of attorney cannot be allotted a share in a suit for partition. Karnataka High Court.
Salary of a legal heir appointed on compassionate grounds does not form part of the deceased’s estate and cannot be attached for recovering debts incurred by the deceased. Liability for such debts is limited to the property inherited, and coercive recovery from the legal heir’s independent earnings is impermissible under Rule 37(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960. Karnataka High Court.
A co-owner cannot enter into a sale agreement for the entire property without the consent of other co-owners. An agreement executed by a co-sharer without full ownership rights is not enforceable under Section 17 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Police notices under Section 41(A) cannot be served through WhatsApp, as it does not ensure proper legal service. Karnataka High Court.
Plaint cannot be rejected by relying on the defendant’s plea of res judicata or by considering contentions beyond the averments made in the plaint itself. The existence of a factual dispute necessitates a full trial for proper adjudication, rather than a summary dismissal at the initial stage. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Acquisition proceedings are rendered void if there is a failure to strictly adhere to statutory timelines and procedural safeguards, such as proper notification, effective hearing of objections, and timely award pronouncement with due approvals, thereby ensuring the protection of property rights against arbitrary state action. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Where a member of a Hindu Joint Family alienates joint family property without establishing ‘kartha’ status, legal necessity, or benefit of the estate, such alienation is valid only to the extent of his undivided share, and not against the shares of other co-parceners or subsequent bona fide purchasers of those shares. Karnataka High Court.
Post-acquisition allottee has no locus standi to challenge de-notification of lands under acquisition relying on the doctrine of promissory estoppel. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Police Act. Mere possession of substantial cash without supporting documents is not an offence under Section 98 unless there is reasonable suspicion or evidence that it was stolen or obtained by fraud. Criminal proceedings based solely on such possession are untenable, especially when the seizure occurred outside the Election Code of Conduct period. Karnataka High Court.
Change of Khata cannot be refused only on the basis of third party objections when the applicant claims title under a registered sale deed/title deed. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Corruption Act. Section 7A applies even to non-public servants who attempt to obtain an undue advantage by influencing public servants. A preliminary inquiry is not mandatory before registering a FIR for a corruption case, especially when the initial complaint or report clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. Property inherited by a female from her mother becomes her absolute, separate property under Section 14(1). Daughter has no right by birth to challenge the disposition of the property by her mother. Karnataka High Court.
The utilization of private land by the State for a public purpose without following due process of acquisition constitutes a violation of the landowner’s constitutional right to property guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution. In such circumstances, the Court is duty-bound to direct the State to initiate compulsory acquisition proceedings in accordance with law and ensure payment of just and fair compensation for the land so appropriated. Karnataka High Court.
Once an order of regrant under the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act attains finality, the Civil Court’s jurisdiction to review or revisit it is impliedly barred. The Court retains jurisdiction to grant reliefs such as declaration or injunction based on the finalized regrant order. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. Requirement of obtaining approval for a single plot layout under Section 17 is prospective and does not apply to lands developed and established prior to declaration of the area as Local Planning Area. Karnataka High Court.
Order VII Rule 11 CPC. A plaint is liable to rejection when the suit is ex facie barred by limitation and the plaintiff fails to disclose a definite right or clear cause of action owing to vague, inconsistent, and contradictory pleadings or documents concerning the alleged title or relationship with the property. The ancillary relief of partition, being contingent upon the time-barred relief of declaration, is equally unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act. When the complaint and FIR reveal cognizable offences like cheating, proceedings cannot be quashed merely because the matter also has a civil aspect, as civil and criminal remedies may coexist. Karnataka High Court.
A suit for recovery of possession simpliciter for possessin property based on encroachment without a prayer for declaration of title is maintainable if the defendant’s pleadings and evidence do not cast a cloud upon the plaintiff’s title. Karnataka High Court.
No income tax can be levied or deductible on compensation for acquiring lands under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act in view of 2013 land acquisition Act. Karnataka High Court.
CGST/KGST Act 2017. A single show cause notice, especially when the transactions in question traverse beyond and span across several/multiple financial years/tax periods. is inherently illegal, as it bypasses mandatory jurisdictional constraints and violates the principles of natural justice by depriving the assessee of the opportunity to provide year-wise explanations and reconciliations. Karnataka High Court.
Administrative Law. A show cause notice issued without proper jurisdiction is legally void/non-est and can be challenged especially if it involves a fundamental flaw of lacking legal basis or if an authority wrongly assumes jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. Suit for cancellation of sale deed. No need to pay ad-valorem court fee on the market value if the property is agricultural land. Karnataka High Court.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. An approved Resolution Plan operates as a final settlement of all claims against the Corporate Debtor. All statutory dues, including tax liabilities, that do not form part of the resolution plan stand permanently extinguished. Any assessment orders or demand notices issued by the Income Tax Department for periods prior to the approval of the plan are void ab initio and without jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Magistrate has no power to order issuance of Red Corner Notice or consequential open-dated warrant either under Cr.P.C., BNSS or any other law. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/87dea439fa89e74339d3068f
Daksha Legal 