Featured

Dying Declaration anatomised- “Death waiting at the doorsteps gives a unique serenity to the mind compelling the maker to state nothing but the truth.” – Karnataka High Court. 4:9:2020

Beerappa vs The State through Town P.S. Yadgiri. Criminal Appeal 200036/2015 decided on 4 September 2020. Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Krishna P Bhat. (author, Justice Krishna P Bhat).

Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/338981/1/CRLA200036-15-04-09-2020.pdf

“What is a dying declaration? It is vain on our part to attempt to define the term, for, it ought to remain undefined and the exercise of characterizing it as such and investing it with probative sanctity, to some extent, must essentially remain an exercise particular to each case. It has, paradoxically, an undying quality about it. It is not a declaration when made; but it has all the solemnity attached to a declaration once the maker dies subject to what is stated in Section 32 (l) of Evidence Act; and the construction put on it in Laxman’s case (supra) and various other authorities. Why is this solemnity attached when the maker is not available to be cross- examined? Does it not seem illogical? Probably, yes. Experience acquired over centuries due to eternal conflict between human nature –  his  proclivities,  and the law has apparently made the law makers to hew this principle to bring about a balance, as  it  were.  Sagacious and revered Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. put it pithily when he said “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” Literature tells us, Sohrab, the son, had apparently retorted to Rustom, the father, “Man who are thou who dost deny my  words? Truth sits upon the lips of dying men, and falsehood, while lived, was far from mine.” (Mathew Arnold  – Sohrab and Rustum). We said – it  has  an  undying  quality about it, for, it is made at a time when the undying hope of life inhering in the chest of every human, starts ebbing away and when the  stark portents of death waiting at the door steps gives a  unique serenity to the mind compelling the maker to state nothing but the truth.” Justice Krishna P Bhat speaking for the bench.

Relevant paragraphs: 16. There is no statutory requirement that the dying declaration need to be in any particular format and further that it should carry certification by a medical officer that the deponent was in a fit state of mind to give statement. A Constitutional Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in (2002) 6 SCC 710 (Laxman Vs. State of Maharashtra) has observed as follows:

“3.  The     juristic     theory  regarding acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every hope of this world is gone, when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the man is induced by the most powerful consideration to speak only the truth. Notwithstanding the same, great caution must be exercised in considering the weight to be given to this species of evidence on account of the existence of many circumstances which may affect their truth. The situation in which a man is on death bed is so solemn and serene, is the reason in law to accept the veracity of his statement. It is for this reason the requirements of oath and cross-examination are dispensed with. Since the accused has no power of cross- examination, the courts insist that the dying declaration should be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of the court in its truthfulness and correctness. The court, however has to always be on guard to see that the statement of the deceased was not as a result of either tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination. The court also must further decide that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and had the opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Normally, therefore, the court in order to satisfy whether the deceased was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration look up to the medical opinion. But where the eyewitnesses state that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make the declaration, the medical opinion will not prevail, nor can it be said that since there is no certification of the doctor as to the fitness of the mind of the declarant, the dying declaration is not acceptable. A dying declaration can be oral or in writing and in any adequate method of communication whether by words or by signs or otherwise will suffice provided the indication is positive and definite. In most cases, however, such statements are made orally before death ensues and is reduced to writing by someone like a magistrate or a doctor or a police officer. When it is recorded, no oath is necessary nor is the presence of a magistrate is absolutely necessary, although to assure authenticity it is usual to call a magistrate, if available for recording the statement of a man about to die. There is no requirement of law that a dying declaration must necessarily be made to a magistrate and when such statement is recorded by a magistrate there is no specified statutory form for such recording. Consequently, what evidential value or weight has to be attached to such statement necessarily depends on the facts and circumstances of each particular case. What is essentially required is that the person who records a dying declaration must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind. Where it is proved by the testimony of the magistrate that the declarant was fit to make the statement even without examination by the doctor the declaration can be acted upon provided the court ultimately holds the same to be voluntary and truthful. A certification by the doctor is essentially a rule of caution and therefore the voluntary and truthful nature of the declaration can be established otherwise.

17. Similarly the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in (2019) 6 SCC 145 (Poonam Bai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh) has observed as follows:

“10. There cannot be any dispute that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for convicting the accused. However, such a dying declaration should be trustworthy, voluntary, blemishless and reliable. In case the person recording the dying declaration is satisfied that the declarant is in a fit medical condition to make the statement and if there are no suspicious circumstances, the dying declaration may not be invalid solely on the ground that it was not certified by the doctor. Insistence for certification by the doctor is only a rule of prudence, to be applied based on the facts and circumstances of the case. The real test is as to whether the dying declaration is truthful and voluntary. It is often said that man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth. However, since the declarant who makes a dying declaration cannot be subjected to cross-examination, in order for the dying declaration to be the sole basis for conviction, it should be of such a nature that it inspires the full confidence of the court. In the matter on hand, since Exh. P2, the dying declaration is the only circumstance relied upon by the prosecution, in order to satisfy our conscience, we have considered the material on record keeping in mind the well established principles regarding the acceptability of dying declarations.”

18. Further, in a case reported in (2009) 13 SCC 614 (Kamalavva  and  Another  Vs.  State  of  Karnataka) the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has observed as follows:

“23. The Constitution Bench in Laxman case also referred to an earlier decision of this Court in Koli Chunilal Savji v . State of Gujarat, wherein it was held that the ultimate test with regard to the admissibility of a dying declaration is whether the dying declaration can be held to be a truthful one and voluntarily given. In the said decision it was also held that before recording the declaration, the officer concerned must find that the declarant was in a fit condition to make the statement. The aforesaid ratio of Koli Chunilal Savji  case  was    affirmed by the Constitution Bench in Laxman case.In Vikas V. State of Maharashtra this Court elaborately  discussed  the  previous relevant decision governing the legality of dying declaration and observed in para 45 as follows : (SCC pp.529-30)

“45. The Court, referring to earlier case law, summed up principles governing  dying declaration as under: (Paniben case, SCC pp. 480-81, para 18)

i. There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration.

ii. If the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can base conviction on it, without corroboration.

iii. This Court has to scrutinise the dying declaration carefully and must ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination. The deceased had opportunity to observe and identify the assailants and was in a  fit state to make the declaration.

iv. Where dying declaration is  suspicious it should not be acted upon without corroborative evidence.

v. Where the deceased was unconscious and could never make any dying declaration the evidence with regard to it is to be rejected.

vi. A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot form the basis of conviction.

vii. Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details as to the occurrence, it is not to be rejected.

viii. Equally, merely because it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded. On the contrary, the shortness of the statement itself guarantees truth.

ix Normally the court in order to satisfy whether the deceased was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration looks up to the medical opinion. But where the eyewitness has said that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make this dying declaration,  the medical opinion cannot prevail.

x. Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon.”

After referring to the decision of this Court in Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, this Court in Vikas reiterated the legal position that where a dying declaration is recorded by a competent Magistrate, it would stand on a much higher footing inasmuch as a competent Magistrate has no axe to grind against the person named in the dying declaration of the victim and in absence of circumstances showing anything to the contrary, he should not be disbelieved by the court.

In Nallapati Sivaiah Vs. SDO, in para 22 it was stated thus: (SCC p.474)

“22. It is equally well settled and needs no restatement at our hands that dying declaration can form the sole  basis for conviction. But at the same time due care and caution must be exercised in considering weight to be given to dying declaration in as much as there could be any number of circumstances which may affect the truth. This Court in more than one decision cautioned that the courts have always to be on guard to see that the dying declaration was not the result of either tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination. It is the duty of the courts to find that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the dying declaration. In order to satisfy itself that the deceased  was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration, the courts have to look for the medical opinion.”

32. The technical objection raised by the counsel for the appellant regarding  the unavailability of doctor’s certification and endorsement as to mental fitness of the deceased is liable to be rejected inasmuch as the same has been held by this Court in numerous decisions as  a mere rule of prudence and not the ultimate test as to whether or not the said dying declaration was truthful or voluntary.”

20. What is a dying declaration? It is vain on our part to attempt to define the term, for, it ought to remain undefined and the exercise of characterizing it as such and investing it with probative sanctity, to some extent, must essentially remain an exercise particular to each case. It has, paradoxically, an undying quality about it. It is not a declaration when made; but it has all the solemnity attached to a declaration once the maker dies subject to what is stated in Section 32 (l) of Evidence Act; and the construction put on it in Laxman’s case (supra) and various other authorities. Why is this solemnity attached when the maker is not available to be cross- examined? Does it not seem illogical? Probably, yes. Experience acquired over centuries due to eternal conflict between human nature –  his  proclivities,  and the law has apparently made the law makers to hew this principle to bring about a balance, as  it  were.  Sagacious and revered Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. put it pithily when he said “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” Literature tells us, Sohrab, the son, had apparently retorted to Rustom, the father, “Man who are thou who dost deny my  words? Truth sits upon the lips of dying men, and falsehood, while lived, was far from mine.” (Mathew Arnold  – Sohrab and Rustum). We said – it  has  an  undying  quality about it, for, it is made at a time when the undying hope of life inhering in the chest of every human, starts ebbing away and when the  stark portents of death waiting at the door steps gives a  unique serenity to the mind compelling the maker to state nothing but the truth.

Conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC upheld.

Compiled by S.Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal

Featured

Refusal to grant financial moratorium. Writ against private banks to implement RBI Circular can be issued. Karnataka High Court.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj

8 July 2020. The Karnataka High Court has held that a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against private banks seeking implementation of the Circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 27 March 2020.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj framed a specific question as to whether a writ of mandamus can be issued against a private bank to implement the Circular issued by the RBI dated 27.03.2020?. While answering this question, the judge has held that It is the obligation and duty of the RBI to regulate the financial institutions, its business as also the credit system of the country, by exercising the powers vested with it under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The RBI circular has permitted the grant of a moratorium to all borrowers so as to keep the viable borrowers/business running. It is therefore clear that the Circular is issued in the public interest and any aspect relating thereto would attract a public law element.

The court relied, inter alia, on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Punjab National Bank and another vs Astamija Dash (2008) 14 SCC 370 to the effect that the said bank was covered within the ambit of Article 12 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court issued a writ when the dispute before the Court was relating to the enforcement of the principle of equality amongst the employees of the Bank, holding that same is a public duty of the Bank.

Proceeding further, the Court held that though the Circular issued by the RBI dated 27 March is not mandatory in so far as the power to grant moratorium, it is mandatory for the Bank to ensure the continuity of viable business. Non-grant of moratorium should not result in adversely affecting the survival and continuity of a viable business. The court in paragraph 22.16 held that Once the banks  have in the public domain on their respective websites expressed their solidarity with all their customers and stated that all the customers are eligible for grant of a moratorium in accordance with RBI guidelines, it is not permissible for such banks to nit-pick and later on refuse the grant of a moratorium to petitioner who is otherwise eligible. That is to say the Banks cannot take one sided stand in the public domain and a contradictory stand while implementing that they have stated in the public domain. Both the RBI and the banks have held out that all customers are eligible for a moratorium. The availing of or otherwise of the moratorium is at the sole discretion of the borrower more so when the borrower would be required to make payment of additional interest during the said moratorium period.

The Court further held that the moratorium under the Circular is applicable even to a structured loan like LRD availed by the customer since the appropriation of the monies of the LRD would have negative impact on the continuity of the petitioner. One bank cannot refuse extension of a moratorium when another or others are willing to extend the benefit or a moratorium.

Allowing the writ petition, the Court granted a writ of mandamus against the Reserve Bank of India to enforce the recovery package contained in the Circular dated 27 March 2020. The communications issued by the banks are also quashed. The Court has directed the Banks to grant moratorium to the petitioner as per the Circular subject to payment of interest portion. The court has also restrained the banks from recovering the loan repayment installment during moratorium.

Case details: Writ Petition 6775/2020 Velankani Information Systems Limited vs Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and others. Decided on 8 July 2020

Judgement Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/334829/1/WP6775-20-08-07-2020.pdf

Compiled by. S.Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal, Bangalore

Featured

“Bharat Mata Ki Jai” – Constitutional Perception” “ಭಾರತ್ ಮಾತಾಕಿ ಜೈ” – ಸಾಂವಿಧಾನಿಕ ಪರಿಕಲ್ಪನೆ.

Last week, a lawyer from Bangalore was thrown out of a television news channel debate when he questioned the “constitutionality” of Indian soldiers shouting “Bholo Bharat Maata Ki Jai” during the Prime Minister’s visit to Ladakh. I made some research on this. Hence this write-up.  

Article 1 of the Constitution of India which deals with ‘Name and territory of the Union’ reads as under:

“India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.”

Perhaps the first reference to Bharata is found in Vishnu Purana (400-300 BC). A Sanskrit shloka reads thus;

उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।

वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।

This shloka means: “The country (Varsam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bharatam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata.

The Bharat Empire i.e.Bharatvarsha originally included the present day of Pakistan, Afghanistan, China, Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Turkmenistan, North-West Tibet, Nepal and Bangladesh.

In ‘The Discovery of India’, a book that he composed in the Ahmednagar Fort during his years of captivity (1942-1946) and published in 1946, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (1946: 38-39) wrote:

“Often, as I wandered from meeting to meeting, I spoke to my audiences of this India of ours, of Hindustan and of Bharata, the old Sanskrit name derived from the mythical founders of the race.”

When ‘The Discovery of India’ was published, these names, Hindustan, Bharat (also Bharata), India, coexisted in the subcontinent. The constant usage also was ‘Jai Hind’ by Nehru and several other political leaders who liked to proclaim “Jai Hind” at the end of speeches. 

Historians believe it was during Moghul rule rather than during British rule, when India was called Hindustan. This led to political and cultural unity of Bhārata, allowing Indians to develop a complete sense of belonging together, irrespective of their religions.

The name Hindustan got its proudest moment when in 1904 Sir Allama Muhammad Iqbal penned his famous patriotic poem “Sāre jahāṉ se acchā, Hindositāṉ hamārā”. Sir Allama Muhammad Iqbal was a poet, philosopher, theorist, and barrister in British India. He is held as the national poet of Pakistan.

Sir. Allama Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938)

The Constituent Assembly on 29 August 1947 constituted the Constitution Drafting Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. From February 1948 to November 1949, the members of the Constituent Assembly examined the draft, moving and discussing in the process almost 2,500 amendments.

On 26 November 1949, we finally adopted the Constitution of India and signed it on 24 January 1950. On 26 January 1950, the Constitution of India officially came into force, and the Constituent Assembly became the Provisional Parliament of India until the first general elections of 1952. It was Dr. Ambedkar who favoured the name Bharat and wanted Constituent Assembly to adopt Article 1 without much debate. However the name was approved after prolonged debates among the members of the Constituent Assembly.

So, four years after the publication of Nehru’s Discovery of India, the drafters of the Constitution decided to write “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States”.  The alternative Article “Hind, or, in the English language, India, shall be a Union of States” was not accepted.

The last speech of Shri Hargovind Pant on this issue is memorable. Let me extract it in full.

“Mr. President, during the early sittings of the Assembly I had moved an amendment to the effect that for the name of the country, we should have the word “Bharat” or “Bharat Varsha” in place of ‘India’. I am gratified to see that some change in the name has at last been accepted. I, however, fail to understand why the word ‘Bharat Varsha’ is not acceptable to the House when the importance and glory of this word is being admitted by all here. I do not want to repeat what the other Members have said in regard to the acceptance of this glorious word, but I would make only a few observations in respect of this word.

‘The word “Bharat” or “Bharat Varsha” is used by us in our daily religious duties while reciting the Sankalpa. Even at the time of taking our bath we say in Sanskrit:

“Jamboo Dwipay, Bharata Varshe, Bharat Khande, Aryavartay, etc.”

It means that I so and so, of Aryavart in Bharat Khand, etc………..

The most celebrated and word-famous poet Kalidasa has used this word in his immortal work depicting the story of his two great characters-King Dushyanta and his queen Shakuntala. The son born of them was named ‘Bharat’ and his Kingdom was known as “Bharat”. There are many fascinating descriptions of the heroism of Bharat in our ancient books. It is said that in his childhood he used to play with lion cubs and overpowered them. We are well acquainted with the story of Bharat. I fail to understand, in view of all this, why we are reluctant to accept, from the core of our heart the word ‘Bharat Varsha’ as the name of our country,

So far as the word ‘India’ is concerned, the Members seem to have, and really I fail to understand why, some attachment for it. We must know that this name was given to our country by foreigners who having heard of the riches of this land were tempted towards it and had robbed us of our freedom in order to acquire the wealth of our country. If we, even then, cling to the word ‘India’, it would only show that we are not ashamed of having this insulting word which has been imposed on us by alien rulers. Really, I do not understand why we are accepting this word.

‘Bharat’ or ‘Bharat Varsha’ is and has been the name of our country for ages according to our ancient history and tradition and in fact this word inspires enthusiasm and courage in its; I would, therefore, submit that we should have no hesitation at all in accepting this word. It will be a matter of great shame for us if we do not accept this word and have some other word for the name of our country. I represent the people of the Northern part of India where sacred places like Shri Badrinath, Shri Kedarnath, Shri Bageshwar and Manasarovar are situated. I am placing before you the wishes of the people of this part. I may be permitted to state, Sir, that the people of this area want that the name of our country should be ‘Bharat Varsha’ and nothing else.”

Shri. Hargovind Pant 1855-1957

Mahatma Gandhi preferred Vande Mataram, which is part of Bankim Chandra’s novel Anandmath published in 1882.

Bharath Matha: It is interesting to note that almost all countries call their Homeland as ‘Motherland’. Only Nazis called their land as ‘Fatherland’. Russians refer to Mother Russia as a personification of the Russian nation. Within the British Empire, many natives in the colonies came to think of Britain as the mother country of one, large nation.  India is personified as Bharat Mata i.e. Mother India. The French commonly refer to France as “la mère patrie”. Hispanic Americans and 19th century-upper-class-Filipinos, commonly referred to Spain as “la Madre Patria”. Romans and the subjects of Rome saw Italy as the motherland. “Fatherland” was mostly featured in news reports associated with Nazi Germany.

The word “Bharat” has a primary place in the foundational document of this nation i.e. the Constitution of India, in the very first article. The insertion was after much debate and discussion by some of the greatest legal/constitutional minds.

Indians calling their homeland as motherland has naturally made the slogan “Bharath Matha Ki Jai” a patriotic gesticulation.

Proclaiming “Bharath Matha Ki Jai” by citizens and soldiers is part of our constitutional spirit. Nothing can inspire a solider in the frontline than proudly shouting this slogan.

The controversy over this issue is the result of half-baked knowledge of lawyers participating in serious debates. This needs to be avoided and curbed.

S.Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal, Member, Karnataka State Bar Council, 9845065416

Bibliography.

1.    ‘India, that is Bharat…’: One Country, Two Names –  Ideas of South Asia Catherine Clémentin-Ojha. https://journals.openedition.org/samaj/3717

2.    Mahatma Gandhi and Bharat Mata ki Jai – S.N. Sahu http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article6431.html

3.    Constituent Assembly of India Debates Volume VII – November 15 and 17, 1948 http://loksabhaph.nic.in/writereaddata/cadebatefiles/C18091949.html

4.    Homeland – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland#Motherland

 

 

“Know Your Judge”. C.M. Joshi. Karnataka High Court.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.M. Joshi celebrates his 62nd birthday today.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandarashekar Mrutyunjaya Joshi: Born on 24.01.1964. Native of Hubballi. Enrolled as Advocate and practiced at Hubballi. Appointed as Munsiff on 08.02.1995. Appointed as District Judge on 06.07.2009. Served as Deputy Secretary, Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Central Project Co-ordinator (Computers), Registrar (Computers) at High Court of Karnataka and as Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Udupi, Belagavi & Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 16.08.2022.

Important judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice C M Joshi.

Criminal law. Call records regarding conversation between accused and deceased are inadmissible in evidence unless the Certificate required under Section 65B of the Evidence Act is produced. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sRsc59ZvrxNYUfN0wMgVfjdmw

Motor Vehicle Act. When a claim petition is filed under Section 163A and the evidence on record shows the income is above Rs.40,000/- p.a, the claim petition is liable to be rejected, unless it is converted to one under Section 166. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/M3DQf8Bqn8yuh7DRlj9iiwWfQ

Disciplinary proceedings against daily wage employee can be initiated under the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 only if his name is notified by the State Government as daily wage employee. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/188NQJk9eEuJbsxbjZ1mXccjN

An order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and hence the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JKErAZPwa2A80zeZY6IJ8YYtf

Property allotted to a female in family partition between herself and her father is her absolute property and does not revert to heirs of her father under Section 15 (2) of the Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0GSAvqWzFvg7BQeuJtMe8MXPE

Service benefits do not form bequeathable estate of Government Servant. Family pension does not form part of the estate of the deceased and as such it cannot be disposed off during lifetime by testamentary disposition. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/nkq4qgzHH8eQerJub77MJieWi

Grant of Succession Certificate will not determine rights of parties since it merely identifies the hands in which death benefits be given and it does not entitle such person to appropriate such benefits to himself. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/FpGy47XzWhxSr6A2u19MQ6ok6

Adopted son becomes a coparcener in the adoptor’s family and cannot claim right in his genitive family properties. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VsbGFAze5zHsxbp8uhudbl7bR

In case of ‘Act Only Policy’ which does not cover pillion rider with extra premium, liability cannot be fastened on the insurance company. Even the principle of ‘pay and recover‘ does not apply in such cases. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/gPDsYnJA9UmTVCcx6qtpnVtVo

When ‘package/comprehensive’ policy is issued, it covers all including the occupant, driver, pillion rider and the owner. Premium paid is irrelevant. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lPPuQpPRt0cLfNpjy7NqzLbQP

Karnataka Excise (General Conditions) Rules. Profit sharing ratio change in a partnership firm by 50% and above amounts to ‘’change of control and management of a firm’’ and attracts payment of transfer fee under the Rules. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/899d5fca0ba22bbcc8414526

The limitation period for instituting probate proceedings for a Will is three years, as per the residuary provision of the Limitation Act, subject to specified exceptions. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ba6b6b45b56c8ec4408877d9

Service Law. Deemed suspension of an employee would continue even after his detention comes to an end by virtue of enlargement on bail or otherwise till after the competent authority issues a formal order revoking the suspension. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cb67b9254289bd3175ee96a0

Hindu Succession Act. Partition of ancestral properties prior to 2004 amendment does not affect rights of daughters in the ancestral property notionally allotted to the father. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0749450816a0b296614abf0d

When brothers partition ancestral property, it continues as ancestral property. Son/daughter born after the partition will automatically acquire rights by birth. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0d9d67afd9ca0054b7972bc4

Service Law. ‘’It is the prerogative of the employer to deploy his staff suitable to the requirement of work/place unless the conditions of service otherwise provide’’. Employees cannot sit in self-judgment as to the validity of transfer order and disobey the same with impunity. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/59ec2b524a9c62870d398ea6

Bombay Pargana and Kulkarni Watan Abolition Act. Watan property belongs to the entire family, with all family members having hereditary interests eligible for a share. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d801eebeebce168cfd5d15d9

Service Law. When a person is placed in independent charge of a post, albeit being eligible for promotion to that post, and later receives retrospective promotion, he is entitled to salary arrears corresponding to the pay scale of the said post. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d53b09384b6f3a7a14b115ec

Karnataka Excise (General Conditions) Rules. Profit sharing ratio change in a partnership firm by 50% and above amounts to ‘’change of control and management of a firm’’ and attracts payment of transfer fee under the Rules. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/899d5fca0ba22bbcc8414526

Urban Development Authority’s imposition of a penalty for non-construction on the allotted site by the allottee within the stipulated period cannot be held to be unreasonable. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/416688f6af7fc3d289dc45f9

POCSO Act. Document relating to date of birth of a student issued by School on the basis of entry of the date of birth made in the admission register can be relied for the purpose of age determination. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eVXsN8XXe7FGAkCaBb5FVy7PY

A person who acquires an interest in the suit property during the pendency of the suit can seek to be impleaded at the appeal stage by invoking Section 146 of the CPC which provision should be interpreted broadly and liberally to promote justice. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/46267a95d6be1d8788102fcd

Order on determination of question as to legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff or a deceased defendant, under Order 22 Rule 5 Civil Procedure Code, does not operate as resjudicata. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f0b2b11f34b36a2bc5a808b6

Cause of action in a partition suit is recurring one. Dismissal of earlier suit for partition for default is not a bar for the second suit. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/articles/actionView/I0ljh6xv2LGTCbdkMgrdpfmAL

Property allotted to a female in family partition between herself and her father is her absolute property and does not revert to heirs of her father under Section 15 (2) of the Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0GSAvqWzFvg7BQeuJtMe8MXPE

Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Disputes involving allegations of fraud can be referred to arbitration unless the allegations of fraud are so serious that they render the arbitration agreement itself void. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/17284d9916b85f4eb00d511e

Karnataka Stamp Act. The maximum stamp duty of Rs. 25 crores on amalgamation of companies specified in the Schedule does not include the additional duty. The duty chargeable under the Act would include not only the stamp duty as imposed under Section 3, but also the additional duty as levied under Section 3B of the Act. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/48f75a8c8d7625801c07919d

Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Arbitral Tribunal is the final arbiter of the disputes and an Arbitrator’s interpretation of the contractual terms are not liable to be interfered with, unless the court finds that no reasonable person could possibly hold the said view. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/84ad8ae8ab4026ba9e0b054a

Commercial Courts Act. Disputes arising from the failure of a lessee to vacate premises used for commercial purposes, after the expiry of the lease term and despite service of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, fall within the jurisdiction of the commercial courts. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/117007e812b69c29bf0c14e2

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act does not provide a fresh cause of action in respect of the acquisitions of land that stand vested with the State. Any person in possession of the land after the same is vested with the State, is required to be treated as a trespasser. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fdde8294ccffdd45d5aeb482

An employer cannot initiate departmental proceedings for incidents that occurred beyond the prescribed limitation period. Once this period has lapsed, an employee’s retirement benefits cannot be withheld indefinitely on the pretext of contemplated disciplinary action. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/171ca88bf6a3c94bb604da59

Income Tax Act. A completed or unabated assessment cannot be reopened under Section 153A unless incriminating material revealing undisclosed income is discovered during the search. The object of Section 153A is to tax such undisclosed income detected in the search, not to arbitrarily reassess concluded matters. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/15571824766f190b5fcb17e7

Income Tax Act. Disallowance of deductions on enhanced income under the proviso to Section 92C (4) is not applicable when an assessee voluntarily declares a higher income based on an Advance Pricing Agreement. An Assessing Officer cannot deny a deduction under Section 10AA on such income. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/437d365d475a1ed3dc03d4d9

Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A civil suit for an injunction to restrain arbitration proceedings is barred under Section 5, as all issues concerning the Arbitral Tribunal’s jurisdiction—including the existence, validity, or limitation of the arbitration agreement—fall exclusively within the Tribunal’s competence under Section 16. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d0b6624875fc049f51ac1fae

General Clauses Act. When the last date for filing a quarry lease renewal application falls on a Sunday or any public holiday, the statutory period for submission automatically extends to the next working day. Rejection of an application filed on the next working day is unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/e7f5f384120019929e95b777

A superior court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 can refuse a successive remand to a statutory tribunal that has repeatedly failed to discharge its basic adjudicatory duty, such as examining evidence, despite earlier directions. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/acbd74d8e36558100ce7cace

Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Revenue authorities are authorized to correct or alter mutation entries in the Record of Rights based on undisputed source-of-title documents even when a civil suit on title is pending. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/00b9a0d4f4bb8fcc876b5848

SARFAESI Act. The borrower’s right of redemption stands extinguished once the secured creditor publishes the auction notice. Any subsequent offer to pay dues or match the auction price after publication and confirmation of sale is invalid, as the SARFAESI Act overrides the general right of redemption under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/c83da3e26513bffbb5e88fdc

Wildlife (Protection) Act. Where land within a National Park’s notified limits is voluntarily surrendered under a Resettlement and Rehabilitation scheme, compensation must be determined under the land acquisition law in force when the scheme was framed, and not under the 2013 Act, even if the surrender occurred after the 2013 Act came into force. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/be2401d8cac1a92ce58c4ce7

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. An Arbitral Tribunal’s award of interest higher than the rate expressly stipulated in the contract on contractual amounts constitutes a patent error and is liable to be set aside under Section 34/37 to the extent of the excess interest awarded. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/239beacdbd31c3067a937077

An oral gift (Hiba) under Mohammedan Law does not require compulsory registration or payment of stamp duty based on market value, and a written record of such a gift does not alter its fundamental nature or requirements. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8c96baa778885882a6dc1c6d

An interlocutory order which is a step in the procedure that leads to final decree, if had not been appealed against, can be a ground in the appeal arising out of the decree. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/481a5a3e4eae313aae3ac975

Employees Compensation Act. Wages specified in the Central Government’s notification under Section 4(1B) must be mandatorily applied and a lesser amount cannot be considered. In cases arising from a vehicular accident where a motor vehicle package policy is involved, the Insurance Company is liable for the interest on the compensation amount. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/78475de7576b5d248afa491a

The compensation for injuries to minors in motor vehicle accidents should be calculated based on the minimum wages of a skilled workman and include future prospects, rather than relying on fixed notional income or disability percentages. Karnataka High Court.

http://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6629c3c45d7cc0d6948fa28c

Courts should refrain from interfering with or halting an election process once it has commenced, even in the face of allegations of illegality or procedural non-compliance. The preparation of the electoral roll is merely an intermediate stage, and once the process is underway, it must be allowed to run its course without judicial interruption. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/32c5eb8f1dc1ad0f2aad152d

Pre-emption under Mohammedan Law. A valid claim must be asserted through two mandatory demands—Talab-e-Muwathaba, made immediately upon sale, and Talab-e-Ishhad, declared before two witnesses and communicated to the seller or purchaser. Issuing a legal notice, even if attested, does not fulfill or replace this customary requirement. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/1c84a4538b4abdcb482b0c16

Town Planning. The validity of a building plan sanction is governed by the law in force on the date of its approval, not the date of application. Mere submission of an application does not confer any vested right or legitimate expectation for consideration under the earlier regulations, particularly when a later statutory amendment introduces restrictions in the public interest. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/c364b6aeaee907f81291e1c6

Eviction suit by co-landlord is maintainable even if one co-landlord transfers his interest during the suit’s pendency. The failure to formally record the assignment under Order XXII Rule 10 of the CPC does not automatically render the suit non-maintainable, especially when the assignee continues to prosecute the case on behalf of the surviving co-landlord. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/00d6e5d097d8ac9e2782abaa

Suit for specific performance. A court exercising its equitable discretion may impose a condition that the purchaser pay an enhanced sale consideration significantly higher than the agreed price to the vendor, in order to balance the equities arising from the escalation of property value due to the efflux of time during litigation. Karnataka High Court.

https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0fce90b5f90a161f3c2c79bc

‘ಮಕ್ಕಳು ತಮ್ಮ ತOದೆ ತಾಯಿ ಆದಾಯ ಮೀರಿ ಗಳಿಸಿದ ಹಣ, ಆಸ್ತಿಗೆ ಫಲಾನುಭವಿಗಳಾಗಬಾರದು. ಅOತಹ ಹಣ ಆಸ್ತಿ ತ್ಯಜಿಸುವುದು ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರಕ್ಕೆ ಮಹತ್ವದ ಸೇವೆ ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಿದOತೆ ಆಗುತ್ತದೆ.’ ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ಬಿ. ವಿ. ನಾಗರತ್ನ.

ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ನಿಗ್ರಹ ಕಾಯಿದೆ ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17ಎ ಅನ್ನು ಅಸ0ವಿದಾನಿಕೆ ಎ0ದು ಘೋಶಿಸಿದ ಸರ್ವೋಚ್ಚ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯದ ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ಬಿ.ವಿ. ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಅವರು ಮತ್ತೋರ್ವ ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ಕೆ. ವಿ. ವಿಶ್ವನಾಥನ್ ಇವರ ತೀರ್ಪಿಗೆ ತಮ್ಮ ಭಿನ್ನಾಬಿಪ್ರಾಯ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ.

ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ಬಿ.ವಿ. ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಅವರು ಭಿನ್ನಾಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ (dissenting judgment) ವ್ಯಕ್ತಪಡಿಸಿ, ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ತಡೆ ಕಾಯ್ದೆ, 1988ರ ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಸಂವಿಧಾನಬಾಹಿರವಾಗಿದ್ದು ರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸಬೇಕೆಂದು ನಿರ್ಣಯಿಸಿದರು. ಅವರ ಮೂಲ ತರ್ಕ ಈ ಕೆಳಕಂಡಂತಿದೆ:

ಪೂರ್ವಾನುಮತಿ ಸಂವಿಧಾನಾತ್ಮಕವಾಗಿ ನ್ಯಾಯಸಮ್ಮತವಲ್ಲ

ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಅವರ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯದಲ್ಲಿ, ತನಿಖೆ, ಪರಿಶೀಲನೆ ಅಥವಾ ತನಿಖಾ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆ ಆರಂಭಿಸುವುದಕ್ಕೂ ಮುನ್ನ ಪೂರ್ವಾನುಮತಿ ಪಡೆಯಬೇಕೆಂಬ ಅವಶ್ಯಕತೆಯೇ ನ್ಯಾಯೋಚಿತವಲ್ಲ. ಅನುಮತಿಯನ್ನು ಯಾರು ನೀಡಬೇಕು ಎಂಬುದಕ್ಕಿಂತಲೂ, ಅಂತಹ ಅನುಮತಿ ಇರಬೇಕೇ ಎಂಬುದೇ ಮುಖ್ಯ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ. ಅವರ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಯಲ್ಲಿ, ಪೂರ್ವಾನುಮತಿ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ, ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ಅದು ತನಿಖಾ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆಯನ್ನು ಆರಂಭದ ಹಂತದಲ್ಲೇ ಅಡ್ಡಿಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.

ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ರದ್ದುಗೊಂಡ ವಿಧಾನಗಳನ್ನು ಪುನರುಜ್ಜೀವನಗೊಳಿಸುತ್ತದೆ

ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಮೂಲತಃ ಸಿಂಗಲ್ ಡೈರೆಕ್ಟಿವ್ ಹಾಗೂ ಡಿಎಸ್ಪಿಇ ಕಾಯ್ದೆಯ ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 6A ಅನ್ನು ಮತ್ತೊಮ್ಮೆ ಜೀವಂತಗೊಳಿಸುವ ಶಾಸನಾತ್ಮಕ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನವಾಗಿದೆ ಎಂದು ಅವರು ಹೇಳಿದರು. ಈ ಎರಡು ವಿಧಾನಗಳನ್ನೂ ವಿನೀತ್ ನಾರಾಯಣ ಹಾಗೂ ಸುಬ್ರಮಣಿಯನ್ ಸ್ವಾಮಿ ಪ್ರಕರಣಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಸುಪ್ರೀಂ ಕೋರ್ಟ್ ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸಿದೆ. ಸುಪ್ರೀಂ ಕೋರ್ಟ್ ಸಂವಿಧಾನಬಾಹಿರವೆಂದು ಘೋಷಿಸಿದ ವಿಧಾನವನ್ನು ಸಂಸತ್ತು ಬೇರೆ ರೂಪದಲ್ಲಿ ಮರುಪರಿಚಯಿಸಲು ಸಾಧ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ.

ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ತಡೆ ಕಾಯ್ದೆಯ ಉದ್ದೇಶವನ್ನೇ ಈ ವಿಧಾನ ವಿಫಲಗೊಳಿಸುತ್ತದೆ

ಭಿನ್ನಾಭಿಪ್ರಾಯದ ಪ್ರಕಾರ, ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಪ್ರಾಮಾಣಿಕ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳನ್ನು ರಕ್ಷಿಸುವ ಬದಲು ಭ್ರಷ್ಟರನ್ನು ರಕ್ಷಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. ಪ್ರಾಮಾಣಿಕ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳಿಗೆ ಇಂತಹ ಸಮಗ್ರ ರಕ್ಷಣೆಯ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೆ ಭ್ರಷ್ಟ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳು ಇದರ ಪ್ರಯೋಜನ ಪಡೆದು, ಪ್ರಾಥಮಿಕ ತನಿಖೆಯನ್ನೂ ತಡೆಯುವ ಮೂಲಕ ತಪ್ಪು ನಡೆಗಳನ್ನು ಆರಂಭದಲ್ಲೇ ಮುಚ್ಚಿಹಾಕುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಇದರಿಂದ ಕಾಯ್ದೆಯ ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ನಿರ್ಮೂಲನಾ ಉದ್ದೇಶವೇ ಹಾಳಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.

ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನದ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾನೂನು ಮರುಬರೆಯುವುದು ಅನುಮತಾರ್ಹವಲ್ಲ

ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17Aಯಲ್ಲಿ ಇರುವ “ಸರ್ಕಾರ” ಅಥವಾ “ಸಮರ್ಥ ಅಧಿಕಾರ” ಎಂಬ ಪದಗಳನ್ನು “ಲೋಕಪಾಲ್” ಅಥವಾ “ಲೋಕಾಯುಕ್ತ” ಎಂದು ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನಿಸುವ ಬಹುಮತದ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋಣವನ್ನು ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟವಾಗಿ ತಿರಸ್ಕರಿಸಿದರು. ವಿಧಾನದ ಸಂವಿಧಾನಿಕ ಮಾನ್ಯತೆಯೇ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಯಲ್ಲಿರುವಾಗ, ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯಗಳು ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನದ ಹೆಸರಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಾನೂನನ್ನು ಮರುಬರೆಯಲು ಸಾಧ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದು ಅವರು ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟಪಡಿಸಿದರು.

ಸಂರಚನಾತ್ಮಕ ಪಕ್ಷಪಾತ ಮತ್ತು ಹಿತಸಂಘರ್ಷದಿಂದ ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಅಯುಕ್ತವಾಗಿದೆ

ಭಿನ್ನಾಭಿಪ್ರಾಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಅಯುಕ್ತತೆಯ ಹಲವು ಮೂಲಗಳನ್ನು ಅವರು ಗುರುತಿಸಿದರು:

  • ನೀತಿಪಕ್ಷಪಾತ: ಒಂದೇ ಇಲಾಖೆಯ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳು ತಮ್ಮ ಸಹೋದ್ಯೋಗಿಗಳ ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಪರಿಶೀಲಿಸುವ ಸ್ಥಿತಿ.
  • ಸಾಮೂಹಿಕ ನಿರ್ಧಾರ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆ: ಹಲವು ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳ ಒಟ್ಟಾರೆ ನಿರ್ಧಾರವಾಗಿರುವ ವಿಷಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಒಬ್ಬ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಯನ್ನು ಮಾತ್ರ ಅನುಮತಿಗಾಗಿ ಅಥವಾ ನಿರಾಕರಣೆಗೆ ಗುರಿಪಡಿಸುವುದು ಕೃತಕ ಹಾಗೂ ಅನ್ಯಾಯಕರ.
  • ಹಿತಸಂಘರ್ಷ: ಅನುಮತಿ ನೀಡುವ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಯೇ ಪರಿಶೀಲನೆಯಲ್ಲಿರುವ ನಿರ್ಧಾರದಲ್ಲಿ ಭಾಗಿಯಾಗಿರಬಹುದಾದ ಸ್ಥಿತಿ.
  • ಸಂಸ್ಥಾತ್ಮಕ, ಒಳವಿಭಾಗೀಯ ನಿರ್ಧಾರ: ಅನುಮತಿ ನಿರ್ಧಾರವು ತಟಸ್ಥತೆ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರತೆಯನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿಲ್ಲ.

ಈ ಎಲ್ಲ ಅಂಶಗಳು ಸೇರಿ, ನೈಸರ್ಗಿಕ ನ್ಯಾಯ ಮತ್ತು ನ್ಯಾಯಸಮ್ಮತತೆಯ ತತ್ವಗಳನ್ನು ಉಲ್ಲಂಘಿಸುತ್ತವೆ.

ಸಂವಿಧಾನಾತ್ಮಕ ಭರವಸೆಗಳ ಉಲ್ಲಂಘನೆ

ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಅವರ ತೀರ್ಮಾನದಂತೆ, ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಅಯುಕ್ತ, ಅತಾರ್ಕಿಕವಾಗಿದ್ದು, ಸಂವಿಧಾನದ ಕಲಂಗಳು 14 ಮತ್ತು 21ಕ್ಕೆ ವಿರುದ್ಧವಾಗಿದೆ. ಇದು ಕಾನೂನಿನ ಆಡಳಿತವನ್ನು ಅಡ್ಡಿಪಡಿಸಿ, ಸಂಸ್ಥಾತ್ಮಕ ಹೊಣೆಗಾರಿಕೆಯನ್ನು ದುರ್ಬಲಗೊಳಿಸಿ, ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ವಿರೋಧಿ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆಗಳ ಮೇಲಿನ ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ನಂಬಿಕೆಯನ್ನು ಕುಂದಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.

ಸಮಾಪನ (ಭಿನ್ನಾಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ)

ನ್ಯಾಯಮೂರ್ತಿ ನಾಗರತ್ನ ಅವರು, ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17A ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ಹೋರಾಡುವ ಸಂವಿಧಾನಾತ್ಮಕ ಕರ್ತವ್ಯವನ್ನು ದುರ್ಬಲಗೊಳಿಸುತ್ತದೆ, ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗಳಿಗೆ ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ಅಮಾನ್ಯಗೊಂಡ ರಕ್ಷಣೆಗಳನ್ನು ಮರುಜೀವಂತಗೊಳಿಸುತ್ತದೆ ಮತ್ತು ತನಿಖಾ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳ ಸ್ವತಂತ್ರತೆಯನ್ನು ಅನ್ಯಾಯವಾಗಿ ಕಡಿತಗೊಳಿಸುತ್ತದೆ ಎಂದು ನಿರ್ಣಯಿಸಿದರು. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ, ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ 17Aಯನ್ನು ಸಂಪೂರ್ಣವಾಗಿ ರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸಬೇಕು ಎಂದು ಅವರು ತೀರ್ಮಾನಿಸಿದರು.

ಉಲ್ಲೇಖಿತ ಭಾಗ (ಶೋಭಾ ಸುರೇಶ್ ಜುಮಾನಿ ಪ್ರಕರಣ)

ಶೋಭಾ ಸುರೇಶ್ ಜುಮಾನಿ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ಅಪೀಲಿ ನ್ಯಾಯಮಂಡಳಿ, ವಶಪಡಿಸಿಕೊಂಡ ಆಸ್ತಿ, (2001) 5 SCC 755 ಪ್ರಕರಣದಲ್ಲಿ, ಸಮಾಜದಲ್ಲಿ ರಾತ್ರೋರಾತ್ರಿ ಶ್ರೀಮಂತರಾಗುವ ಪೈಪೋಟಿ, ಅತಿರೇಕದ ಹಾಗೂ ಅಶ್ಲೀಲ ಐಶ್ವರ್ಯ ಪ್ರದರ್ಶನ, ಮತ್ತು ಭೌತಿಕತೆಯ ಮನೋಭಾವದ ಸ್ವೀಕಾರದಿಂದಾಗಿ ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರವು ಕ್ಯಾನ್ಸರ್‌ನಂತೆ ಬೆಳೆಯುತ್ತಿದ್ದು, ಜನರ ನೈತಿಕ ಮೌಲ್ಯಗಳನ್ನು ಹಾಗೂ ಸರ್ಕಾರದ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಆಡಳಿತಾತ್ಮಕ ರೂಪಗಳನ್ನು ಹಾನಿಗೊಳಪಡಿಸಿದೆ ಎಂಬುದನ್ನು ಈ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಂಗ ಗಮನಕ್ಕೆ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಂಡಿತು.

    ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರವು ಲಾಲಸೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅಸೂಯೆಯ ಫಲಿತಾಂಶವಾಗಿದೆ. ಇವು ತಿಳಿದ ಆದಾಯ ಮೂಲಗಳನ್ನು ಮೀರಿದ ಭೌತಿಕ ಸಂಪತ್ತನ್ನು ಸಂಗ್ರಹಿಸುವ ಅಸ್ವಸ್ಥ ಸ್ಪರ್ಧೆಗೆ ಕಾರಣವಾಗುತ್ತವೆ. ಒಬ್ಬನು ಮತ್ತೊಬ್ಬನಿಗಿಂತ ಭೌತಿಕ ಶ್ರೇಷ್ಠತೆಯನ್ನು ತೋರಿಸಲು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸುವಾಗ, ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಸಂಪತ್ತು ಸಂಗ್ರಹಿಸುವ ಸ್ಥಿತಿ ಉಂಟಾಗಬಹುದು. ಲಾಲಸೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅಸೂಯೆಯ ಮನೋಭಾವವನ್ನು ನಿಯಂತ್ರಿಸಿ ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಿಂದ ಅಳಿಸಿಹಾಕದಿದ್ದರೆ, ತಿಳಿದ ಆದಾಯ ಮೂಲಗಳನ್ನು ಮೀರಿದ ಸಂಪತ್ತಿನ ಸಂಗ್ರಹದಿಂದ ಉಂಟಾಗುವ ಭ್ರಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ಮತ್ತು ಲಂಚವನ್ನು ಕಡಿಮೆ ಮಾಡಲಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಅಥವಾ ನಿರ್ಮೂಲಿಸಲಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಇಂತಹ ಪ್ರವೃತ್ತಿಗಳನ್ನು ತಡೆಗಟ್ಟುವ ಒಂದು ಮಾರ್ಗವೆಂದರೆ, ಭೌತಿಕ ಆಸಕ್ತಿಯಿಂದ ದೂರವಿರುವ ಆತ್ಮೀಯ/ಆಧ್ಯಾತ್ಮಿಕ ಮನೋಭಾವವನ್ನು ಬೆಳೆಸಿ, ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರಸೇವೆಯತ್ತ ಗಮನ ಹರಿಸುವುದಾಗಿದೆ.

    ಈ ದೇಶದ ಯುವಕರು ಮತ್ತು ಮಕ್ಕಳು ತಮ್ಮ ಪೋಷಕರು ಅಥವಾ ಸಂರಕ್ಷಕರು ತಿಳಿದ ಆದಾಯ ಮೂಲಗಳನ್ನು ಮೀರಿಸಿ ಗಳಿಸಿದ ಯಾವುದನ್ನಾದರೂ ಅದರ ಫಲಾನುಭವಿಗಳಾಗುವ ಬದಲು, ಅದನ್ನು ತ್ಯಜಿಸಬೇಕು. ಇದರಿಂದ ಅವರು ಉತ್ತಮ ಆಡಳಿತಕ್ಕೆ ಮಾತ್ರವಲ್ಲ, ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರಕ್ಕೂ ಅತ್ಯಂತ ಮಹತ್ವದ ಸೇವೆಯನ್ನು ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಿದವರಾಗುತ್ತಾರೆ.

    “Know Your Judge”. Jayant Banerji. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jayant Banerji celebrates his 61st birthday today.

    • Justice Jayant Banerji was born on 17/01/1965.
    • Appointed as Additional Judge on Sep 22, 2017.
    • Took oath as Permanent Judge on Sep 06, 2019.
    • His Lordship was transferred as a Judge of Karnataka High Court and assumed office on 19.07.2025.

    Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jayanth Banerji in Karnataka High Court.

    A court cannot grant police protection to enforce a status quo order without first making a judicial determination of its violation. When facts and evidence are unclear, the Court should not delegate its responsibility to an external investigating or law enforcement agency, as this would confer upon such authority a jurisdiction it does not lawfully hold. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d59b7d18abbc5163527524a5

    Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Government has the authority to refer a departmental inquiry to the Upa-Lokayukta, even if a separate disciplinary inquiry has already been initiated and the same is at an advanced stage. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/a6de797af217bf432f1ffca8

    Group of Companies Doctrine in Indian arbitration law. Where a non-signatory holding company plays major role at the stage of agreement between the parties, offers irrevocable guarantee and promotes the project, the company can be impleaded in the arbitration proceedings. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/77b53ec5eca2e2fff4a4a44a

    ”ವಕೀಲರು ವಾರದ ಕೊನೆಯಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಏಕೆ ನನ್ನ ಬಳಿ ಬರುತ್ತಾರೆ?”. ವೈದ್ಯರ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ.

    ಬಸವರಾಜ್. ಎಸ್. ಹಿರಿಯ ವಕೀಲರು. ಸದಸ್ಯರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಪರಿಷತ್.

    ಕಳೆದ ವಾರ ವೈದ್ಯರೊಬ್ಬರು ತಮ್ಮ ವಕೀಲರ ಜೊತೆ ಕಾನೂನು ಸಲಹೆಗೆ ಕಚೇರಿಗೆ ಬ0ದ್ದಿದ್ದರು. ಅವರೊ0ದು ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆ ಕೇಳಿದರು. “ಅದು ಸರಿ, ನೀವು ವಕೀಲರು ಯಾವುದೇ ಸಮಸ್ಯೆ ಇರಲಿ, ವಾರದ ಕೊನೆಯಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ಅ0ದರೆ ಶನಿವಾರ ಸ0ಜೆ ಅಥವಾ ಭಾನುವಾರವೇ ಏಕೆ ವೈದ್ಯರ ಬಳಿ ಹೋಗುತ್ತೀರಿ.?”

    ಕೆಲ ಸಮಯ ಯೋಚಿಸಿ ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿದೆ. ಇದು ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿಯ ಕಾರ್ಪಣ್ಯ. ಊರಲ್ಲಿನ ಸ್ವ0ತ ಮನೆ ಬೀಳುವ ಸ್ತಿತಿಯಲ್ಲಿದ್ದರೂ ನಾವು ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರನ ಮನೆ ರಕ್ಷಿಸಲು ತಕ್ಷಣ ಕಾರ್ಯಪ್ರವೃತ್ತರಾಗುತ್ತೇವೆ. ದಿನವಿಡೀ ಹೋರಾಡಿ ಆಸ್ತಿ, ಮನೆ ಉಳಿಸುತ್ತೇವೆ. ತಮ್ಮ ಹೊಲ ತೋಟ ಬೀಳು ಬಿದ್ದರೂ ಗಮನಿಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಆದರೆ ರೈತ ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರನ ಹೊಲ ಬೆಳೆ ಕಾಪಾಡಲು ವಾರವಿಡೀ ಶ್ರಮಿಸುತ್ತೇವೆ.

    ವಾರದ ಎರಡನೇ ದಿನವೇ ಜ್ವರ ಇತ್ಯಾದಿ ಕಾಹಿಲೆಗಳು ಬ0ದರೂ ಎಷ್ಟು ವಕೀಲರು ತಕ್ಷಣವೇ ವೈದ್ಯರ ಬಳಿ ಹೋಗುತ್ತೀರಿ? ಕಾಯಿಲೆಗೆ ಒ0ದೋ ಎರಡೋ ಮಾತ್ರೆ ನು0ಗಿ ಸಮಸ್ಯೆ ಮು0ದೆ ಹಾಕಿ ನ0ತರ ವಾರದ ಕೊನೆಯಲ್ಲಿಯೇ ವೈದ್ಯರ ಬಳಿ ಹೋಗುವುದು.

    ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಕೇವಲ ಉದ್ಯೋಗವಲ್ಲ; ಅದು ಸೇವೆ, ಸಮರ್ಪಣೆ ಮತ್ತು ನಿರಂತರ ತ್ಯಾಗದ ಜೀವನಶೈಲಿ. ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯದ ಒಳಗೆ ಕಾಣುವ ವಕೀಲರ ಹೋರಾಟದ ಹಿಂದೆ, ಅನೇಕ ಬಾರಿ ಕಾಣದಿರುವ ಒಂದು ಕಠಿಣ ಯಥಾರ್ಥ ಅಡಗಿದೆ — ತಮ್ಮ ಕುಟುಂಬ ಜೀವನ, ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕ ಸಂತೋಷ ಮತ್ತು ಆರೋಗ್ಯವನ್ನೇ ಮರೆತು ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರರಿಗೆ ದುಡಿಯುವ ಜೀವನ.

    ಒಬ್ಬ ವಕೀಲನ ದಿನ ಬೆಳಗಿನ ಜಾವದಿಂದಲೇ ಆರಂಭವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಕಡತಗಳ ಪರಿಶೀಲನೆ, ತೀರ್ಪುಗಳ ಅಧ್ಯಯನ, ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರರೊ0ದಿಗೆ ಸಭೆಗಳು, ಮತ್ತು ದಿನಪೂರ್ತಿ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯದ ವಾದ-ವಿಚಾರಣೆ. ಸಂಜೆ ಆದರೂ ಕೆಲಸ ಮುಗಿಯುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಮರುದಿನದ ಪ್ರಕರಣಗಳ ಸಿದ್ಧತೆ, ಕಾನೂನು ಸಂಶೋಧನೆ, ಅರ್ಜಿಗಳ ಕರಡು ಬರವಣಿಗೆ — ಇವೆಲ್ಲವೂ ರಾತ್ರಿ ತಡವರೆಗೆ ಮುಂದುವರಿಯುತ್ತವೆ.

    ಈ ದೌಡ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಕುಟುಂಬಕ್ಕೆ ಸಮಯ ನೀಡುವುದು ಬಹುಸಾರಿ ಸಾಧ್ಯವಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಮಕ್ಕಳ ಬೆಳವಣಿಗೆಯ ಮಹತ್ವದ ಕ್ಷಣಗಳು, ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಸಂಭ್ರಮಗಳು, ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕ ಸಂತೋಷದ ಕ್ಷಣಗಳು — ಇವೆಲ್ಲವೂ “ನಾಳೆ ನೋಡೋಣ” ಎಂಬ ಮಾತಿನ ಹಿಂದೆ ಸರಿದು ಹೋಗುತ್ತವೆ. ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಸದಸ್ಯರು ವಕೀಲರ ವೃತ್ತಿಯ ಗಂಭೀರತೆಯನ್ನು ಅರಿತು ಮೌನವಾಗಿ ತ್ಯಾಗ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ.

    ಇದರೊಂದಿಗೆ ವಕೀಲರ ಆರೋಗ್ಯದ ಮೇಲಿನ ಪರಿಣಾಮವೂ ಗಂಭೀರವಾಗಿದೆ. ನಿರಂತರ ಒತ್ತಡ, ಅನಿಯಮಿತ ಆಹಾರ, ನಿದ್ರಾಭಾವ, ಮತ್ತು ಮಾನಸಿಕ ತಾಣಾವರಣವು ಹಲವಾರು ವಕೀಲರನ್ನು ದೈಹಿಕ ಹಾಗೂ ಮಾನಸಿಕ ಆರೋಗ್ಯ ಸಮಸ್ಯೆಗಳತ್ತ ತಳ್ಳುತ್ತದೆ. ಆದರೂ, “ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರರ ಹಿತವೇ ಮೊದಲು” ಎಂಬ ವೃತ್ತಿಧರ್ಮವು ಅವರನ್ನು ವಿಶ್ರಾಂತಿ ಪಡೆಯಲು ಸಹ ಅವಕಾಶ ನೀಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.

    ವಿಶೇಷವಾಗಿ ಸಂಕಷ್ಟದಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರರಿಗಾಗಿ ವಕೀಲರು ತಮ್ಮ ವೈಯಕ್ತಿಕ ನೋವನ್ನು ಬದಿಗಿಟ್ಟು ನಿಂತು ಹೋರಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ನ್ಯಾಯ ದೊರಕಿಸಿಕೊಡುವ ಹೊಣೆಗಾರಿಕೆ, ಕಕ್ಷಿದಾರರ ಭರವಸೆ, ಮತ್ತು ನ್ಯಾಯಾಂಗದ ಮೇಲಿನ ನಿಷ್ಠೆ — ಇವೆಲ್ಲವೂ ವಕೀಲರನ್ನು ನಿರಂತರವಾಗಿ ಕೆಲಸಕ್ಕೆ ಬಾಧ್ಯರನ್ನಾಗಿಸುತ್ತವೆ.

    ಸಮಾಜ ಬಹುಸಾರಿ ವಕೀಲರನ್ನು ಕೇವಲ ವಾದಗಾರರಾಗಿ ನೋಡುತ್ತದೆ. ಆದರೆ ಅವರ ಹೋರಾಟದ ಹಿಂದೆ ಇರುವ ತ್ಯಾಗ, ಶ್ರಮ ಮತ್ತು ಮೌನವಾದ ನೋವುಗಳು ಅಷ್ಟಾಗಿ ಗುರುತಿಸಲ್ಪಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ನ್ಯಾಯದ ಬೆಳಕನ್ನು ಉಳಿಸಲು ಅನೇಕ ವಕೀಲರು ತಮ್ಮ ಜೀವನದ ಕತ್ತಲೆಯನ್ನು ಸಹಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ.

    ಅದಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿಯನ್ನು ಕೇವಲ ವೃತ್ತಿಯಂತೆ ಅಲ್ಲ, ಒಂದು ಸೇವಾ ಯಜ್ಞದಂತೆ ನೋಡಬೇಕು. ವಕೀಲರು ತಮ್ಮ ಕರ್ತವ್ಯ ನಿರ್ವಹಣೆಯ ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಆರೋಗ್ಯ ಮತ್ತು ಕುಟುಂಬ ಜೀವನಕ್ಕೂ ಮಹತ್ವ ನೀಡುವಂತಹ ವಾತಾವರಣವನ್ನು ನಿರ್ಮಿಸುವುದು ಸಮಾಜದ ಜವಾಬ್ದಾರಿಯೂ ಹೌದು.

    ನ್ಯಾಯಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಹೋರಾಡುವ ವಕೀಲರು, ತಮ್ಮ ಜೀವನವನ್ನೇ ಪಣಕ್ಕಿಡುವ ಮೌನ ಯೋಧರು.

    “Know Your Judge”. Umesh M. Adiga. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Umesh M. Adiga celebrates his 62nd birthday today.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Umesh Manjunath Bhat Adiga: Born on 09.01.1964. Native of Gadag. Enrolled as Advocate and practiced at Gadag. Appointed as Munsiff on 08.02.1995. Appointed as District Judge on 06.07.2009. Served as Registrar (Vigilance) High Court of Karnataka, Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, Dharwad and as Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru. Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 16.08.2022.

    Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Umesh M Adiga.

    Service Law. Person ineligible for the post cannot question the appointment of another person to the post since Public Interest Litigation is impermissible in Service matters. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dkllsV6yLApcTI0vMBk36ueJD

    When proceedings are initiated under the Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act, the authorities are bound to examine whether the grant comes within the purview of the Act. Karnataka High Court.  

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/knyP6X0qU1GSKaKOj5QXLenQO

    Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Competent authority has discretion to reduce the percentage of damages under Section 14B and the same is justiciable. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Bo2POtFSS5h25GuN9rYugrfTp

    Mere payment of premium amount before occurrence of accident will not cover liability if the insurance policy is issued with effect from the time after the accident. Karnataka High Court.  

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WdjePhtI9Mcj3G1HCapAgHfzq

    Mere existence of Arbitration Clause does not bar jurisdiction of the Civil Court unless the party exercises his right under Section 8 of the A & C Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wmCmITKVQysZ76UZBIPrkNxfJ

    Where driver of vehicle had no valid and effective driving licence, the insurance company shall pay the compensation to the claimant and recover the same from owner of the vehicle. Karnataka High Court reiterates. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KTohNi0scrGMCG88PW03QRIMX

    MVC Act. Amputation of leg need not always result in 100% disability for the purpose of awarding compensation when the claimant can do the work which is not strenuous in nature. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/udkOeV7yKIdTeFHtQuBxtwqzQ

    Borrower of motor vehicle steps into the shoes of the owner of the vehicle and hence the borrower of the vehicle or his legal heirs are not entitled for compensation. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4uLoS35AvEzCdQGRQuO1p74ja

    “Coparcenary system continues even after the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act.” Karnataka High Court explains the principles behind succession and survivorship.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/09ff1203861b457fdba31787

    Income Tax Act. Exemption from restriction on cash transaction can be claimed only for special exigencies the burden of proving is on the assessee. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BgWqjPltgcpzB4sqwD2ztf310

    Hindu Succession Act. When a person with a living daughter is adopted into another family, the daughter remains a part of her natural family and retains her right to inherit a share of her natural family’s ancestral property. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7683bbd43c07e5658ede2323

    Motor Vehicles Act. Assessment of the notional income for a minor must be based on the minimum wages payable to a skilled worker. Burden of furnishing the applicable minimum wage data rests on the insurance company if the claimant fails to produce it. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f626fb008c4a6b09a43ab790

    Labour Law. When a reinstatement award is passed in favor of a workman, and the implementation of that award is subsequently stayed by an appellate court upon the employer’s challenge, the principle of ‘no work no pay’ will not apply for the period the stay order was in operation, as the workman was prevented from working due to the employer’s legal challenge. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0d99e62db17a6f752c1f90f5

    Mohammedan Law. The mere registration of a gift deed does not, by itself, establish compliance with all legal requirements. A valid gift must be supported by three essential elements: a clear declaration by the donor, acceptance by the donee, and contemporaneous as well as continuous delivery of possession to the donee. Unless these elements are proved, the donor remains entitled to subsequently alienate the property, and the donee cannot rely on an earlier, unproven gift to challenge the validity of later transactions. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3e2b99943838c15b59c64141

    Motor Vehicles Act (unamended). The Insurer is liable to indemnify the owner for an accident that occurs within the 30 days grace period after expiry of the license period as the driver is deemed to possess a valid licence. Absence of a driving licence does not per se establish contributory negligence unless a direct link is proved between the lack of the licence and the occurrence of the accident. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/75244c38ec8fb02aa0bb08d8

    “Know Your Judge”. B.M. Shyam Prasad. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.M. Shyam Prasad celebrates his 55th birthday today.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bhotanhosur Mallikarjuna Shyam Prasad: Born on 8th January 1971. Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and took oath on 14.02.2018 and Permanent Judge on 07.01.2020.

    Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.M. Shyam Prasad. 

    Property inherited by a female from her parents reverts back to heirs of her father on she dying intestate and without issues. Suit for declaration by husband claiming such property ought to be rejected under Order 7 rule 11. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NWLKO48RRXZ6i2vVzSBW34wIs

    Once parties acknowledge existence of arbitration clause, Court can appoint arbitrator even if stamp duty is insufficiently paid. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/u2ntQqAc5HYTyzYrqEjahBZVD

    When the prosecution fails to prove major offence, the minor and related offence falls into insignificance and the accused will be entitled to acquittal. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6kOPhZhSX9PhLmdSbdJoyg0VF

    Arbitration and Conciliation Act. When arbitrator withdraws from the office, substitute arbitrator can be appointed only under Section 11 read with Section 15 and under Section 29A(4) thereof. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kr56zwOoMI67AGDKvEURnTZPo

    Appeal court should not allow amendment unless there is an error in the decree of the trial court and when the amendment relieves the party who lost the case from the consequences of a decision rendered on merits. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/C2RKlsSnuzv8PR0K2MiDB7jnv

    Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958. Suit for cancellation of sale deed in respect of agricultural land. Valuation is based on the land revenue and not on the amount shown in the sale deed. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/XHwSeoIldKEHJ5yZMh1SbjsQr

    Property inherited by a female from her parents reverts back to heirs of her father on she dying intestate and without issues. Suit for declaration by husband claiming such property ought to be rejected under Order 7 rule 11. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NWLKO48RRXZ6i2vVzSBW34wIs

    Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Questions of facts that impact title cannot be decided in proceedings under Chapter XI. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/PQZXALCma7nn1QdRZlH6HMjTR

    Bombay Pargana and Kulkarni Watan Abolition Act. Watan property belongs to the entire family, with all family members having hereditary interests eligible for a share. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d801eebeebce168cfd5d15d9

    Karnataka Stamp Act. Civil court cannot delegate its power to the District Registrar of Stamps to decide on the nature of the document and to determine the deficit duty. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/66fa35b9e9f839de43052b77

    Petition for Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ITALzJNwgnLNch6fj8kRkXZe8

    Wife with good educational qualification who quit salaried employment without any reason cannot demand maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Sg2NM9xS3d6MhzG0vztcItRkB

    BBMP Act. Improvement expenses can be collected in instalments for transfer of khata. Non-payment of instalment cannot be a reason to deny benefit of revenue entry since the amount can be recovered in accordance with law. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/C8UCbF2KQuWY52iJwpRa2yjvY

    Inter-State transmission of electricity under Section 11 of the Electricity Act 2003 can be regulated only by the Central Government. Karnataka High Court nullifies order of the State Government.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/zZfWEQ0cWCvVIsvMXnhaEiyIy

    Pious obligation under the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act arises only if the plaintiff is able to demonstrate that the defendant has inherited some asset or estate from the deceased debtor. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0dh92Sr6cpwIhzWXoNDOgZbP1

    Once a property is brought under BBMP limits, the Karnataka Land Revenue Act ceases to apply. Denial of a consolidated Khatha on the ground of non-conversion of the land is not sustainable. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/b0c394330292d5deedc2a52b

    Writ jurisdiction. The State is not exempt from the application of the doctrine of delay and laches, as an unexplained delay is fatal and prevents the re-opening of a finality attained by an order of the Tribunal. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6f223a222ad2699c71ffc473

    Hindu Marriage Act. The right of a spouse to receive permanent alimony under Section 25 is not only available at the time of passing of a decree but any time subsequent thereto on an application. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2c33ab13c3ee6b83cd477af9

    Family Courts should liberally allow an amendment to include a prayer for permanent alimony in a matrimonial petition, even at a later stage, as permanent alimony is a relief incidental to the main prayer for dissolution of marriage. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/edc8636570961103bf792555

    Payment of Gratuity Act. The Controlling Authority has the discretion to decide whether to levy compound interest on delayed gratuity payments under Section 8, after providing the employer a reasonable opportunity to present its case. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d489ff425eb1d2ad5d37d483

    Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act. If a Grama Panchayat does not communicate its decision on an application for a building license or trade license within 60 days, the licenses are deemed to have been granted by operation of law. The authority cannot later invalidate the deemed approval. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4259938fa9913804e8e94c0a

    When a development has been approved under a prevailing Interim Master Plan, the subsequent notification of a final Master Plan that alters the land use designation does not revoke the prior development approval. The validity of the prior approval persists, especially where the developer has acted in accordance with it and third-party rights have been created. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dd630de315f29256e403d3fd

    Karnataka Rent Act. Carpet area and the area covered by the walls of the premises, constitutes ‘plinth area’, which is to be taken into consideration for the purpose of application of the Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f2722d1245b7cfe825cc0e4c

    “Know Your Judge”. Ashok S. Kinagi. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok S. Kinagi celebrates his 56th birthday today.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok S. Kinagi: Born on 01.01.1970. Enrolled as an Advocate in the year 1995. Practiced in High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench from 2008 to till date.

    Practiced in the field of Civil, Land Acquisition and Service Matters etc,.

    Panel Advocate – Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society, Gulbarga, Khaja Banda Nawaj Education Society, Gulbarga, Alstom Project India Limited, Shahabad, ACC, Wadi, Karnataka State Financial Corporation, Karnataka State Industrial and Development Board, Ganesh Co-Operative Bank, Gulbarga, Punjab National Bank, Gulbarga, Hutti Goldmines, Hutti, Dist. Raichur, The Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited.

    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 Ashok S. Kinagi.

    Resumption under the Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act cannot be ordered when grantee obtained conversion of land for non-agricultural purposes before the alienation. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OiwuuVQoRpueJqpc7FH7hYD6L

    Stay of suit under Section 10 CPC is permissible only if the whole subject-matter in both the proceedings is identical and not incidentally or collaterally in issue. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ISyNrSJgH381e8MtCf04I4l04

    Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. When earlier suo-motu proceedings were dropped by the Assistant Commissioner, fresh proceedings cannot be initiated by the grantee without challenging the said order. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/AJoh9OSw8sVKmUY0TY8lh8ZRs

    Karnataka Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act. The Civil Court must record a clear finding about land grabbing in order to transfer the case to Special Court. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/EGK34DoAowG3lrQycFrNCzzDc

    Land restored under SC/ST (PTCL) Act to original grantees cannot be construed as Government land to invoke the provisions of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KMirgxzIfHIasSUONZITE3FNF

    Constitution of India. Article 226. In a writ petition challenging the interim order passed by a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal, refusal to interfere is a rule and interference is an exception. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f6Nx5lw1qIxLAedTjeNJh6qlU

    Intra-court appeal under the Karnataka High Court Act is not maintainable against an order passed by the Single Judge assailing an award passed by the Labour Court. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/l0APyr5QOvLYbT4oaN5KX6ECp

    Even an earlier registered sale deed does not confer right over property declared subsequently as Wakf property as long as the declaration is not set aside. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rjUWKppk5Jz9Crx4A9DRrYfhx

    Application for amendment of pleadings cannot be entertained after the commencement of trial, unless the party could not raise the issue before commencement of trial. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sMarBhAdVKojnF0UufQjj3BcG

    Corporation cannot demand tax in respect of an industrial plot unless the industrial area is included within the Corporation limits. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/RK1tWgpbzRJ8W20fMI68zH1RQ

    Khata of property cannot be changed when civil suit in respect of the property is pending adjudication before the Court. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VRjwUmsxIdjlhPxowCXaMuqLN

    KMMC Rules. When the order of Competent Authority is approved by the Controlling Authority, who is also the Revision authority, Revision can only be filed before the State Government. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qShEUGV1528ixEHut1KH6TnwW

    Committees under Article 194(3) of the Constitution are not vested with adjudicatory jurisdiction which belongs to judicature under the constitutional scheme. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/DRiFF4ELOPCsOOmhovGy5jU0W

    Allotment of industrial plot cannot be cancelled on the ground of delay in implementing the project when the delay is attributable to reasons beyond the capacity of the allottee. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MpX5z3ecw3FQlLMJp2Xt83JlL

    Transfer of Property Act. Upon valid transfer of property, attornment of tenancy takes place and the tenant cannot question such derivative title. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/QLLLgiNiMY5RdR3XbB9M9o6Az

    Property of first wife dying intestate goes even to the legally married second wife after the death of her husband. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LMHdIWYo2SZXPoAijtDGUKZlL

    Unless the factum of Benami transaction is established, property purchased in the name of female becomes her absolute property. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/x26LL47guabJs0lpH9QE5bbb5

    Suit for specific performance. When the defendant neither pleads nor leads evidence on hardship, Court shall decree the suit especially when the plaintiff proves readiness & willingness. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZYHIFcx04MWCD3uvVPPjBcDAm

    Resumption under the Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act cannot be ordered when grantee obtained conversion of land for non-agricultural purposes before the alienation. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OiwuuVQoRpueJqpc7FH7hYD6L

    Mohammedan law. Though a written document recording a gift (Hiba) is not compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act, the validity of such a gift is contingent upon the donor’s clear intention to divest title and the actual delivery of possession. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/b5083fd0e65600501aa526b4

    Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act. When Inam lands are re-granted by the government to the senior-most male member of the family, such re-grant is presumed to enure to the benefit of all the members of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fbdfcd5ee405cf2b91612434

    A registered partition deed, where a minor’s father has accepted cash in lieu of share, cannot be reopened as unequal or unjust unless the minor, on attaining majority, proves it was prejudicial to their interests. The burden lies on the plaintiff, and mere oral claims are insufficient to set aside a legally executed partition. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/050a1d5d2031f8d7fbe5ebe2

    Even an earlier registered sale deed does not confer right over property declared subsequently as Wakf property as long as the declaration is not set aside. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/16dd56975e06d3c48168fbe1

    A Second Appeal under Section 100, Code of Civil Procedure is not maintainable to challenge a part of a trial court’s decree if that part was not contested by way of an appeal or a cross-objection before the first appellate court. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d5558cf369a699ed6190ed40

    A suit for declaration of a right, including a challenge to a registered Will, is barred by limitation if it is not filed within three years from the date when the plaintiffs had knowledge of the document. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/662088ebce0eb1ce0621843f

    Civil court has no jurisdiction to determine the validity of an order passed by the Land Tribunal due to the bar under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Any order by a Civil Court setting aside a Land Tribunal’s decision would be void and without legal effect. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3a952d569f98e6d66d1220a3

    “Status of husband and wife for the purpose of Section 24 has been achieved by the spouses by the solemnization” In proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act, it is the legal duty of the husband to maintain the wife, especially when the wife has no independent source of income. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f5361e4ea9afc0ea90fd7caf

    An amendment to pleadings should generally be allowed before the commencement of trial if it is necessary for the proper adjudication of the dispute and does not alter the nature of the suit. Mere delay in seeking an amendment is not a valid ground for rejection, and any prejudice to the opposing party can be compensated with costs. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/771e516ba39eda747788bb04

    Hindu Succession Act. When a person with a living daughter is adopted into another family, the daughter remains a part of her natural family and retains her right to inherit a share of her natural family’s ancestral property. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7683bbd43c07e5658ede2323

    Hindu Law. Alienation of an undivided share in joint family property by a coparcener is valid only to the extent of his share and is not binding on the shares of the non-alienating coparceners. The purchaser must seek to have the alienated property allotted to the vendor’s share during the final decree proceedings of the partition suit. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/dc09262b8997528b85600cf1

    A suit for partition based on the continued existence of joint family property is liable to be dismissed when the evidence demonstrates that the family’s joint status was severed by prior partial partitions and by the subsequent division of the remaining properties under a Will executed by the propositus. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/bb51d0d0416f083f3bd4956c

    A claim for adverse possession fails when party making the claim asserts title through a sale agreement and, in the written statement, denies the title of the true owner. Such stand prevents the establishment of a hostile possession required for a claim of adverse possession. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8fed3486f86938d283a17f24

    Property of first wife dying intestate goes even to the legally married second wife after the death of her husband. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/de21a609ff6ad02a7b3f7561

    Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Tahsildar has no power to invite applications from landless persons unless a prior order has been passed by the Land Tribunal under Section 67 of the Act which determines that the land is in excess of the ceiling area and is to be surrendered to the State Government. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/e057d2d0bbe8f609208e64dd

    Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide an ejectment suit when a claim for occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act has been rejected by the Land Tribunal, and that order has achieved finality. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7661ed177106f63c0923c38a

    A suit for perpetual injunction is not maintainable when the plaintiff admits the defendant’s possession. Withdrawal of a prior suit with liberty to file a fresh one does not automatically validate a subsequent suit. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/34becb23f0ca5858f4b5f92f

    Civil suit against Forest Officers who act under the color of duty to preserve forest land is not maintainable without sanction of the State Government under Section 114-A of the Karnataka Forest Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/y1iurkwuwmKFmSjrvjaehltPQ

    Issue regarding valuation and Court fees cannot be tried as a preliminary issue in a suit and shall be tried along with other issues. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/CyRjk03cFcS7mUVjkJpGeCYhP

    Specific performance. Agreement executed within the prohibited period under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act cannot be specifically enforced. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JXbvzbdckChHoVjXFDJpo1KqR

    Violation of condition in land grant order will not result in automatic cancellation of the grant unless the Government initiates proceedings for resumption of the land. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JtXVUH9RmrCs4V9LcX1QeKALm

    Court Fee. When agricultural land falls within the Corporation limit, the market value has to be taken into consideration even though the land continues to be shown as agricultural in the revenue records. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HkAL3PAu5vbuxONOKfhi0o1vo

    When Court dismisses suit for declaration of title over the property, it cannot grant consequential relief of injunction. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/JqwSQTq6C8L2ZyKAVKbR4nNOF

    “Dependency on daughter does not end with her marriage”. Parents can seek compensation for the death of their daughter in a motor vehicle accident. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/YDS3pP7FsADexvx4huD28syXL

    Power of attorney executed in favour of blood relatives as mentioned in the Karnataka Stamp Act need not be stamped as a document of conveyance. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KTGpPlrPqnrMIOpJh0M53Z8NN

    Sale of ancestral property. Recitals in the sale deed of legal necessity do not by themselves prove the legal necessity though they are admissible in evidence. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/DCTfmAhlPFYnuhaDoxGvzTS1c

    Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Land converted for non-agricultural purposes no longer remains ‘granted land’ and hence there is no requirement of prior permission to sell such land. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/E45odxkodFuDhdjNGkJv36YV5

    Persons who purchased suit schedule property during the pendency of suit for specific performance can be added as additional defendant. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OvGKh1uIz1CF8oMo5DRVLJuLb

    Delay in completion of the project on the industrial site allotted by the KIADB. Allotment cannot be straightaway cancelled by the authority without giving opportunity to the allottee. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OrhSyIDPU905gZ3aTOfk67ucB

    In a suit for declaration, the plaintiff is expected to prove his title to a high degree of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/a7PrNU32SJlsz0dmpEmxrWjR1

    “Know Your Judge”. Muralidhara Pai. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Muralidhara Pai celebrates his 59th birthday today.

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Muralidhara Pai: Born on 31.12.1966. Native of Borkatte in Karkala Taluk, Udupi District. Enrolled as Advocate and practiced at Bengaluru. Appointed as Civil Judge on 11.02.1997. Served as Senior Faculty Member of Karnataka Judicial Academy, Additional Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka – Kalaburagi Bench, Principal District & Sessions Judge at Mangaluru and Belagavi, The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka and Principal City Civil and Seesions Judge, Bengaluru. 

    Appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 30.09.2025 

    Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Muralidhara Pai. 

    Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Partial rejection of a plaint is impermissible. Even in a partition suit where certain properties are alleged to be unavailable, the court’s power extends only to rejecting the plaint in its entirety, as the expression “plaint” denotes the whole pleading. This power is distinct from the striking out of portions of the plaint. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d1314b489e5dfa4a3fdaa0f8

    Preventive detention. If the detaining authority fails to provide the detenue with legible copies of all relied-upon documents, the same constitutes a fundamental violation of the right to make an effective representation guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. Strict compliance with all constitutional and statutory safeguards is mandatory for the exercise of the draconian power of preventive detention. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/e32225b283cedcbbfba57fb4

    Victim Compensation Scheme. Power to award compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. is not ancillary to other sentences. In criminal cases resulting in death, courts have a mandatory duty to judiciously apply their mind to ensure suitable compensation is recommended for the dependent victims, such as minor children. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fa8391c637862659be0a7e70

    “Know Your Judge”. K. S. Mudagal. Karnataka High Court.

    Hon’ble Mrs. Justice K. S. Mudagal celebrates her 62nd birthday today.

    Hon’ble Justice Kottravva Somappa Mudagal: Born on December 22, 1963. Obtained B’Com, LL.B. from Karnataka University, Dharwad. Joined legal profession on 6th July, 1988 as an Advocate at Dharwad and Bangalore. Appointed as District Judge on 17.06.1998. Sworn in as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14th November, 2016 and Permanent Judge on 03.11.2018.

    Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Justice  K.S. Mudagal.

    Prima facie case includes maintainability of the suit. When maintainability of the suit is doubtful or the suit is prima facie vexatious, it cannot be said that the applicant has prima facie case. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sd0Q8L8Vsn72lJaNK9hRpTVBP

    Civil Procedure Code. Order 39 Rule 2A. Dismissal of the main suit does NOT absolve the defendants of their liability for breach of injunction order. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HDi8Ar70SeQsU7IKaNDGgKGrt

    Civil Procedure Code. Order 39 Rule 2A. Party knowingly violating injunction order cannot contend that the order is null and void or irregular and hence need not be obeyed. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/doq2ZJ1cL174XoTShzazVpvY1

    Father is liable to pay maintenance to the major daughters and also their marriage expenses. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/safl4XAfonRmtRcXiuhJkQYm9

    Rejection of Plaint. When plaint is sought to be rejected on a pure question of law, the application cannot be dismissed on the ground that the same shall be considered on a full-fledged trial. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qMSVh6gNu4M7hjsvuCfxuulkn

    Lok Adalat award in respect of cheque bounce case. Amount can be recovered by Fine Levy Warrant under Section 421 Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7MvnKohB6twQdFnx5soDk5xw8

    Daily waged employees working in the local bodies like Zilla Panchayats, on their regularization, are entitled for payment of gratuity from the date of their initial appointment. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Zve6Y66D7jmAg0DwH4jw7OWBY

    Delay and laches in filing Writ Petition. Where respondents/authorities are themselves guilty of delay and latches, they cannot raise such plea against petitioner. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZwFdOWD8MGRgR9hesBCLJMmke

    UAP Act. Informal body of individuals ‘concerned’ with the terrorist act, though not actually involved in terrorist act, is also covered under the definition of ‘terrorist gang’. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uGaf6mIY8LqirEHQlLzHbvugL

    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

    Proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which are brought before a Family Court, are civil in nature. The Court has the discretion to accept evidence via affidavit. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8b5099a70b6b05c2aa027f9b

    ‘Criminal Law. Investigation agencies dishing out charge sheet under public pressure only to quench and quell the public angst resuling in perfunctory and lopsided investigation requires introspection’. Karnataka High Court, while acquitting the accused in triple murder case.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8ebd127b6256b1321ab507b8

    Review Petition by non-party to the proceedings. Court can review compromise decree recorded in Regular Second Appeal if there was suppression of facts affecting the rights of third party. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/D7Kh5F5ITMkXO3QdgnXyzzAKZ

    Rider of two-wheeler not possessing driving license. Insurance Company is NOT liable for compensation. Karnataka High Court. 

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VtxHqMbCMFBvq62sksg47VJJU

    Unregistered sale deed cannot be received in evidence even for the collateral purposes of proving possession. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kr1ILiFm8QqqsjeFNRQ0MeIMH

    Civil suit questioning attachment of property under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules is not maintainable without exhausting the remedy provided under Section 101 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/oNHZFvtImqqTWP5XKVgq7mb0W

    For the lands falling within Corporation limits, there is no need to obtain conversion from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/XVQW4GToCwGdrW8wh7NPuI2Mn

    Hindu Law. There can be partition of ancestral properties among the cousins and need not always be among the direct brothers. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kiicapGeNHKavK6qPVLiTDRFd

    Native Christians of Coorg province. Pending suit for partition based on the Shasthric Hindu Law is not maintainable after the issuance of 2015 notification making Indian Succession Applicable to them. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LRb4Ivbd1DV1vGyiqf1w9FLEF

    Prima facie case includes maintainability of the suit. When maintainability of the suit is doubtful or the suit is prima facie vexatious, it cannot be said that the applicant has prima facie case. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sd0Q8L8Vsn72lJaNK9hRpTVBP

    Occupancy rights granted under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in favour of one of the member of the family enure to the benefit of the members of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.

    https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lF5DMXHGrmAQlMrRSa3Pl3uh3

    Industry showing payment of overtime wages as conveyance charges to evade the ESI contribution. Karnataka High Court imposes exemplary cost on the appellant industry.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0I7Ub7xrWjtqw1kh5hnvFyfHJ

    Defense of ouster in a suit for possession. The adverse possession pleaded must be open, express or implied repudiation of the rights of the true owner and the hostility must be within the knowledge of true owner. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cde5f29561bc4fad17b78f88

    Irrespective of a party not filing appeal against dismissal of the suit for partition and separate possession, Court can grant relief in appeal invoking Order XLI Rule 33 of C.P.C. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/oFp4Zu7PHNvVkamQTBOyddDIc

    Court cannot refer a case relating to non-compoundable offence to Lok Adalat and Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to determine such case. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/SuXT6tGDrf3ZNJtwJ82gw0BhU

    Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138 not only includes the cheques issued towards the discharge of any debt, but other liability also. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/xLxdPabUGBEBSis6bkIxjoDHj

    Unstamped partition deed cannot be relied upon for the purpose of enforcing pre-emption clause contained therein. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pwXoqKLUV5Dv0EMgIzq9sZAOU

    When a document is admitted in evidence at the instance of a party, entire contents of the document shall be accepted. Party producing the document cannot contend that only portion of the document shall be accepted. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cOzHcDr5pPpKirFiAOOFgCHnj

    Though Christian law does not recognize adoption, it does not prohibit adoption. Adopted children of Christian parents have right of inheritance. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/1eq6RjH4AZlsAkIjhrUNyCm4A

    When minor’s property is sold without Court permission, the minor on attaining majority need not seek cancellation of the sale deed. He can simply repudiate the sale and validly transfer the property. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Vo8yNcsXDXheORtEc7YSD0AJK

    Rejection of Plaint. When plaint is sought to be rejected on a pure question of law, the application cannot be dismissed on the ground that the same shall be considered on a full-fledged trial. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qMSVh6gNu4M7hjsvuCfxuulkn

    Prima facie case includes maintainability of the suit. When maintainability of the suit is doubtful or the suit is prima facie vexatious, it cannot be said that the applicant has prima facie case. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sd0Q8L8Vsn72lJaNK9hRpTVBP

    Civil Procedure Code. Order 39 Rule 2A. Dismissal of the main suit does NOT absolve the defendants of their liability for breach of injunction order. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HDi8Ar70SeQsU7IKaNDGgKGrt

    Civil Procedure Code. Order 39 Rule 2A. Party knowingly violating injunction order cannot contend that the order is null and void or irregular and hence need not be obeyed. Karnataka High Court.

    https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/doq2ZJ1cL174XoTShzazVpvY1

    ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ವಿವರಣೆ

    ಬಸವರಾಜ್. ಎಸ್. ಹಿರಿಯ ವಕೀಲರು. ಸದಸ್ಯರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಪರಿಷತ್.

    ವಕೀಲರಿಗೋಸ್ಕರ 1983ರ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿ ಕಾಯ್ದೆ ಅಡಿ ಸ್ಥಾಪಿಸಲಾದ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ವಿವರಣೆ ನೀಡುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿರುವುದರಿ0ದ ಈ ಸಣ್ಣ ಲೇಖನ.
    ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿ ಈಗ ಇರುವ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾತ್ರ ವಿವರಣೆ ನೀಡಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಹಳೆಯ ತಿದ್ದುಪಡಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ವಿವರಣೆ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ.ವಕೀಲರು ಹಣ ಸ0ದಾಯದ ವಿವರ. ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾಗುವ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲಿ ರೂ. 1,000 ಗಳನ್ನು ವಕೀಲರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಗೆ ನೀಡಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ನ0ತರ ಪ್ರತಿ ವರ್ಷ ರೂ. 1,000 ಗಳನ್ನು ವಕೀಲರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಗೆ ಸ0ದಾಯ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    15 ವರ್ಷ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ ವಕೀಲರು ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಗೆ ಪ್ರತಿ ವರ್ಷ ರೂ. 2,000 ಸ0ದಾಯ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ಮು0ದುವರೆದು, 15 ವರ್ಷ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ ವಕೀಲರು ಒಮ್ಮೆ ರೂ. 25,000 ಅಜೀವ ಸದಸ್ಯತ್ವ ಸ0ದಾಯ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಪ್ರತಿ ವರ್ಷ ಹಣ ಕಟ್ಟುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ.
    ಪದಾ0ಕಿತ ಹಿರಿಯ ವಕೀಲರು ಪ್ರತಿ ವರ್ಷ ರೂ. 10,000 ರೂಗಳನ್ನು ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಗೆ ಸ0ದಾಯ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಇದು ರೂ. 25,000 ಸ0ದಾಯ ಅಜೀವ ಸದಸ್ಯತ್ವ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರೂ ಕೂಡ ಕಟ್ಟಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಇದರ ಕಾರಣ ಹಿರಿಯ ವಕೀಲರು ಚೀಟಿಯನ್ನು (ಸ್ಟಾ0ಪ್) ಹಾಕುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.
    ಮರಣ ಪರಿಹಾರ. ವಕೀಲರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಯಿ0ದ ಈ ಕೆಳಕ0ಡ0ತೆ ಪರಿಹಾರ ನೀಡಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾದ 15 ವರ್ಷದೊಳಗೆ ಮರಣ ಹೊ0ದಿದರೆ ರೂ. 4 ಲಕ್ಷ.
    ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾದ 15 ರಿ0ದ 35 ವರ್ಷದೊಳಗೆ ಮರಣ ಹೊ0ದಿದರೆ ರೂ. 6 ಲಕ್ಷ.
    ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾದ 35 ವರ್ಷದ ನ0ತರ ಮರಣ ಹೊ0ದಿದರೆ ರೂ. 8 ಲಕ್ಷ.
    ಗಮನಿಸಿ. 40 ನೆ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನ ನ0ತರ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿಗೆ ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದಲ್ಲಿ
    6:8:2010 ರ ನ0ತರ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿ ಸದಸ್ಯತ್ವ ಹೊ0ದಿದ್ದಲ್ಲಿ
    ಸ್ವ0ತ ಇಚ್ಚೆಯಿ0ದ ಸನದ್ದನ್ನು ಅಮಾನತುಗೊಳಿಸಿದ್ದಲ್ಲಿ
    1:8:2000 ರ ನ0ತರ ಸದಸ್ಯತ್ವ ಹೊ0ದಿ 60 ವರ್ಷ ವಯಸ್ಸಾಗಿದ್ದಲ್ಲಿ
    ಪ್ರತಿ ವರ್ಷ ರೂ. 10,000 ದ0ತೆ ಗರಿಷ್ಠ ರೂ 3 ಲಕ್ಷ ನೀಡಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ಇದು ವಿವೃತ್ತಿಗೂ ಅನ್ವಯಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.
    ನಿವೃತ್ತಿ ಪರಿಹಾರ. ಈ ವರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ಪರಿಹಾರ ಕೋರುವ ವಕೀಲರು ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾದ ದಿನದಿ0ದ 50 ವರ್ಷಗಳ ಕಾಲ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಿರುತ್ತದೆ ಅಥವಾ 75 ವರ್ಷ ವಯಸ್ಸಾಗಿರಬೇಕು. ತಡವಾಗಿ ನೊ0ದಣಿಯಾದ ವಕೀಲರು 75 ನೇ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ ನಿವೃತ್ತಿ ಕೋರಿದರೆ ಹಣದ ಮೊತ್ತ ಬದಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ ಅ0ದರೆ;
    ಅವರ 75 ನೆ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ 15 ವರ್ಷ ಮಾತ್ರ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರೆ ರೂ. 4 ಲಕ್ಷ,
    75 ನೆ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ 35 ವರ್ಷ ಮಾತ್ರ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರೆ ರೂ. 6 ಲಕ್ಷ,
    75 ನೆ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿ 35 ವರ್ಷಕ್ಕಿ0ತ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರೆ ರೂ. 8 ಲಕ್ಷ.
    ಆಸ್ಪತೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ದಾಖಲಾದ 3 ತಿ0ಗಳೊಳಗಾಗಿ ಅರ್ಜಿ ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಬೇಕು.
    ವಕೀಲರು 75 ವಯಸ್ಸಿಗಿ0ತ ಕಿರಿಯ ವಯಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿಯೂ ನಿವೃತ್ತಿ ಪರಿಹಾರ ಕೋರಬಹುದು. ಆದರೆ ಅವರಿಗೆ ಶಾಸ್ವತ ಊನತೆ ಉ0ಟಾಗಿ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮು0ದುವರೆಸಲು ಸಾದ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ ಎ0ಬ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಜಿಲ್ಲಾ ವೈದ್ಯಕೀಯ ಸರ್ಜನ್ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಹಾಜರು ಪಡಿಸಬೇಕು.
    ಖಾಯಿಲೆ ಪರಿಹಾರ. 5 ವರ್ಷ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿದ ವಕೀಲರು ಈ ವರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ರೂ. 1,50,000 ದವರೆಗೆ ಪಡೆಯಬಹುದು. ಇದು ಒ0ದು ಬಾರಿ ಮಾತ್ರ. ಈ ಹಣವನ್ನು ಅ0ತಿಮವಾಗಿ ನೀಡುವ ಹಣದಲ್ಲಿ ಕಡಿತಗೊಳಿಸಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ಇದಲ್ಲದೆ ಭಾರತೀಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಪರಿಷತ್ತಿನಲ್ಲಿ ರೂ. 50,000 ಪಡೆಯಬಹುದು. ಇದು ಒ0ದು ಬಾರಿ ಮಾತ್ರ. ಈ ಹಣವನ್ನು ಕಡಿತಗೊಳಿಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.
    ಯಾವ ಖಾಯಿಲೆಗಳಿಗೆ ಹಣ ನೀಡಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ?. ಕ್ಯಾನ್ಸರ್, ಏಡ್ಸ್, ಬ್ರೇನ್ ಟೂಮರ್, ಮಾನಸಿಕ ರೋಗ, (Mental disorder), ನಡೆದಾಡಲು ಮತ್ತು ಮಾತನಾಡಲು ಆಗದ ಪಾರ್ಶ್ವವಾಯು (Paralysis). ಇತರೆ ಖಾಯಿಲೆಗಳಿಗೆ ಸಮಿತಿ ನೀಡಬೇಕೆ0ದರೆ ವೈದ್ಯಕೀಯ ತಜ್ಞರ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಪಡೆಯಬೇಕಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
    ಹಣಕಾಸಿನ ತೊ0ದರೆ ಪರಿಹಾರ. ಆರ್ಥಿಕ ಪರಿಸ್ತಿತಿ ಬಿಗಡಾಯಿಸಿದಾಗ ವಕೀಲರು ವಕೀಲರು ರೂ. 1,50,000 ದವರೆಗೆ ಪಡೆಯಬಹುದು. ಇದು ಒ0ದು ಬಾರಿ ಮಾತ್ರ. ಈ ಹಣವನ್ನು ಅ0ತಿಮವಾಗಿ ನೀಡುವ ಹಣದಲ್ಲಿ ಕಡಿತಗೊಳಿಸಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಈ ವರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ಭಾರತೀಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಪರಿಷತ್ತಿನಿ0ದ ಯಾವುದೆ ಹಣ ನೀಡಲಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ.
    ಈ ವರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಣ ಪಡೆಯಬೇಕಾದಲ್ಲಿ (1) ವಕೀಲರಿಗೆ 65 ವರ್ಷ ವಯಸ್ಸಾಗಿರಬೇಕು (2) ಹಾಗೂ 20 ವರ್ಷ ವಕೀಲ ವೃತ್ತಿ ಮಾಡಿರಬೇಕು (3) ಹಾಗೂ ಕಲ್ಯಾಣ ನಿಧಿಗೆ 12 ವರ್ಷ ಸದಸ್ಯರಾಗಿರಬೇಕು. ಈ ಎಲ್ಲ ಮೂರು ಅ0ಶಗಳೂ ಇರಬೇಕು.

    ಬಸವರಾಜ್. ಎಸ್. ಹಿರಿಯ ವಕೀಲರು. ಸದಸ್ಯರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ರಾಜ್ಯ ವಕೀಲರ ಪರಿಷತ್.