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;
उत्तरंयत्समुद्रस्यहिमाद्रेश्चैवदक्षिणम्।
वर्षंतद्भारतंनामभारतीयत्रसंततिः।।
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 Iqbalpenned 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 ofShri 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:
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
Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.M. Nadaf celebrates his 50th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice T. M. Nadaf: Born on 07.07.1976, Native of Shiggaon, Haveri District. Graduated in Law from Vivekananda College of Law, Rajaji Nagar Bengaluru. Enrolled as an Advocate on 11.08.2000. Appeared before Civil Courts, Magistrate Courts, Tribunals, and High Court. In 2008, he shifted his practice to the High Court of Karnataka, Bench at Dharwad, where he distinguished himself through his expertise in civil, constitutional, service, labour, and criminal law. Empanelled as an Advocate in the High Court Legal Cell from 2020 till his elevation. Appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 17.02.2025.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.M. Nadaf.
Even though the amended Section 5 of the PTCL Act removes the limitation period for initiating proceedings, the principle of laches continues to apply. Courts can deny relief in cases where there is an unreasonable delay in seeking restoration of land, especially if such delay causes prejudice to the other party. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Termination of a probationer simpliciter is valid when the order merely mentions unsatisfactory performance and does not carry stigma. Previous complaints and actions taken thereon are immaterial if the termination order does not refer to them. Karnataka High Court.
Consumer Protection Act. Complaints against banks alleging deficiency in service, particularly those arising from marital disputes or involving criminal allegations, are not suitable for adjudication through the summary procedure of consumer forums. Such complaints are liable to be dismissed, especially where the complainant had prior knowledge of the transactions in question. Karnataka High Court.
When adjudicating an industrial dispute involving contract labour, the Labour Court has the authority to examine whether the labour contract is a sham or camouflage to deny statutory benefits to the workmen, regardless of the specific terms of the reference. Karnataka High Court.
State Financial Corporations Act. Proceedings under the Act are akin to the execution proceedings and the investigation is summary in nature and not a full-fledged civil trial. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal authorities cannot issue trade licenses that violate zonal regulations governing land use. If a property is designated primarily for residential use with limited permission for commercial use, the issuance of a trade license for commercial activities exceeding the permissible limit does not legalize the unauthorized commercial use. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. A sale deed executed in respect of granted land under the Act and presented for registration prior to obtaining permission is not void ab initio if the registration is completed after obtaining valid permission. Karnataka High Court.
State Financial Corporations Act. Proceedings under the Act are akin to the execution proceedings and the investigation is summary in nature and not a full-fledged civil trial. Karnataka High Court.
Consumer Protection Act. Complaints against banks alleging deficiency in service, particularly those arising from marital disputes or involving criminal allegations, are not suitable for adjudication through the summary procedure of consumer forums. Such complaints are liable to be dismissed, especially where the complainant had prior knowledge of the transactions in question. Karnataka High Court.
Where no proper notice is served on all parties after a prior remand, and the Land Tribunal fails to record who was in actual cultivation as tenant on the relevant date, a fresh remand is justified. Delay in challenge does not bar such relief if the petitioners were unaware of the proceedings due to lack of notice. Karnataka High Court.
When a court grants a legal benefit to certain individuals, the principle of treating similarly situated persons equally requires that the same benefit be extended to all others in identical circumstances, without necessitating separate litigation. Authorities are duty-bound to apply such decisions uniformly to all comparable cases. Karnataka High Court.
The High Court, under Article 226, should not adjudicate property title disputes, especially when a civil suit on the same matter is pending. While a land designation in a master plan may lapse if not acquired or utilized within five years, any subsequent action on a change of land use application depends on the outcome of the title dispute in the civil court. Karnataka High Court.
The regularization of unauthorized land occupation and the subsequent issuance of a Saguvali Chit are invalid if the granting committee’s order lacks a reasoned basis and fails to follow the prescribed legal procedures. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Mere allegations of fraud against the purchaser and illiteracy on the part of the original grantee, without specific details, are insufficient to invalidate the transaction, particularly when the application for resumption is filed after an inordinate delay. Karnataka High Court.
A disciplinary enquiry and criminal proceedings against a government employee cannot proceed when the foundational report and FIR on which they are based have been quashed. Karnataka High Court.
A subordinate court order based on a submission or concession made by the petitioner’s counsel cannot be questioned in a writ petition since the appropriate course is to seek modification of the order before the same court. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention. When the detaining authority has correctly distinguished a ‘public order’ issue from a ‘law and order’ issue, and if all mandatory procedural requirements, such as supplying the detenue with all relied-upon documents, have been strictly complied with, the court will not substitute its own opinion for the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Even non-dependent legal representatives of a deceased person are entitled to compensation for loss of dependency. A married daughter also is considered a legal representative and is entitled to compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Combination of tractor and trailer is a goods carriage. Even if only the trailer and not the tractor is insured, the insurer of the trailer remains liable to compensate third-party claims arising from its use. Karnataka High Court.
BDA Act. Development scheme does not lapse if it has been substantially implemented. Where possession is taken, infrastructure is formed, sites are allotted, conveyances are registered and third-party rights are created, the acquisition becomes complete and irreversible. Deposit of compensation in the government treasury amounts to valid payment. Karnataka High Court.
When a special statute prescribes a specific time limit for filing an appeal and expressly restricts the period for which delay can be condoned, the Courts cannot exercise discretionary powers to extend that period further. Mere filing and subsequent withdrawal of proceedings before the High Court does not reset the limitation timeline. Karnataka High Court.
‘High-rise buildings containing pocket apartments, irrespective of the luxury and amenities they offer, cannot be permitted to stand where they pose a risk to public safety, particularly to the residents of the building and those residing in the neighbouring and surrounding areas.’ Karnataka High Court upholds suspension of the sanctioned plan.
When adjudicating an industrial dispute involving contract labour, the Labour Court has the authority to examine whether the labour contract is a sham or camouflage to deny statutory benefits to the workmen, regardless of the specific terms of the reference. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Lokayukta Act. An order entrusting a disciplinary enquiry to the Lokayukta based merely on its report under Section 12(3), without independent application of mind or establishment of a prima facie case, and merely reproducing the report despite contrary departmental findings, is liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Insurance company is liable for accidents involving insured machinery like crane on public roads when a specific additional premium ‘third party liability cover’ has been paid for. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Holder of licence to drive a Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) can drive/operate mobile crane, it being a non-transport vehicle with an unladen weight below 7,500 kgs. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Registration Act. When a General Power of Attorney holder vested with full powers executes a sale deed, he is deemed to be the ‘person executing’ the document under Section 32(a). In such a case, authentication of the GPA by the Sub-Registrar is not required. Authentication is necessary only when an agent merely presents the document on behalf of the principal. Karnataka High Court.
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.
Urban Planning. A person who voluntarily relinquishes portion of land in favour of Planning Authority is deemed to have ‘acquiesced’ to that action. Such a party cannot later belatedly challenge the validity of the notification simply because other similarly situated persons succeeded in a legal challenge. Karnataka High Court.
When a non-executant seeks declaration that the sale deed is null or void and does not bind on him, he has to merely pay court fee on the value of the reliefs sought and not ad valorem court-fee on the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deeds. Karnataka High Court.
Specific Relief Act. Where the executant of a deed wants it to be annulled, he has to seek cancellation of the deed. But if a non-executant seeks annulment of a deed, he has to seek a declaration that the deed is invalid, or non est, or illegal or that it is not binding on him. (Referred) Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. When a Mitakshara Hindu father partitions his self-acquired property among his sons, the shares allotted to the sons become their separate and absolute properties. Such property does not acquire the character of ancestral or coparcenary property in the hands of the sons with reference to their own children. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.G.S. Kamal celebrates his 55th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. G. Shukure Kamal: Born on 30th June, 1971 at Kodlipet, Kodagu District. Did his Primary & Secondary education both at Kodlipete and Suntikoppa of Kodagu District. Completed his PUC at Govt. Senior College, Madikeri and did his BAL.,LL.B. at Vidyavardhaka Law College, Mysuru. He was enrolled as an Advocate with the Karnataka State Bar Council on 05.08.1994. He appeared before the High Court of Karnataka, City Civil and Sessions Court, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Courts, Debt Recovery Tribunals at Bengaluru, mainly in Civil, Criminal, Constitutional, Labour, Arbitration, Revenue and Wakf matters. His Lordship appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 17.03.2021 and Permanent Judge on 30.09.2022.
Important judgments delivered by Justice M.G. Shukure Kamal.
Principles of Natural Justice. In the absence of any legal right, the principles do not apply. Authority passing resolution in favour of a person without any statutory backing can withdraw it without prior notice. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act 1894. Land acquired and vested with the Government can NOT be withdrawn. Unless there is material to rebut statutory presumption, notification under Section 16(2) is evidence of taking possession. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Market value. Amount awarded under consent award in respect of similarly situated land acquired for similar purpose can be treated to be the base price. Karnataka High Court.
A representative suit cannot be permitted to the withdrawn or compromised without complying with mandatory procedure under Order 1 Rule 8 (4) of the Civil Procedure Code. Karnataka High Court.
Though a minor can be beneficiary/ recipient under a contract, he cannot be subjected to any obligation or burden of performance of any reciprocal promise. Karnataka High Court.
Action taken pursuant to and upon an insufficiently stamped document cannot be termed as illegal, null and void and nonest in the eye of law in the absence of any specific provisions thereof. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Merely because the agreement does not stipulate any time, the same cannot be expected remain unperformed for all the time to come. Karnataka High Court.
Bombay-Karnataka area. Succession among Hindus coming under the Bombay School of Inheritance. Sister was entitled for a share if the succession had opened prior to 1956. Karnataka High Court.
“Writ Petition seeking revision of voters list cannot be maintained except by the persons aggrieved.” Karnataka High Court, while dismissing the petition filed by MLA seeking rectification of voters list of his constituency.
Indian Succession Act. Succession Certificate cannot be issued in respect of immovable property in Karnataka. Authorities cannot insist on production of Succession Certificate for transfer of khata of the property bequeathed under a Will.
State or its authorities cannot levy tax on the properties belong to Union of India constructed after the commencement of the Constitution of India in view of Article 285. Karnataka High Court.
Limitation Act. When calculating the delay in filing an appeal, the time spent prosecuting a Civil Revision Petition that was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds must be excluded, as per Section 14. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. If a document is already adjudicated and the stamp duty is paid, the trial court cannot impound the same document again under Section 34 of the Act and direct payment of stamp duty and penalty for a second time. Karnataka High Court.
Upon execution of the sale deed and payment of stamp duty, the agreement to sell merges with the sale deed. No additional stamp duty is payable on the agreement unless the sale consideration differs between the two documents. Karnataka High Court.
Mere execution of lease-cum-sale deed and possession certificate without actual delivery of possession will not absolve the BDA to allot alternate site when the site itself is not handed over to the allottee. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition initiated under the 1894 Act. If compensation amounts in respect of majority of land holdings are not deposited as on the date of the commencement of the 2013 Act, the compensation is required to be determined as per the provisions of the said 2013 Act. Karnataka High Court.
BDA scheme for residential apartments. Purchaser of a residential property is liable to pay GST if booking is made prior to completion of construction. Karnataka High Court.
A court fee dispute in civil suit should be decided as a preliminary issue only if it affects the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction; otherwise, it can be considered along with other issues in the suit. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. In partition suits, if a plaintiff claims joint possession, the suit can be valued under Section 35(2). The possession of one co-owner is presumed to be possession of all unless specifically excluded. Karnataka High Court.
Allotment of compensatory sites. Once a sale deed is executed and registered, the BDA loses all rights over the property. Unilateral cancellation of the sale deed by the authority is arbitrary, illegal, and unenforceable. Karnataka High Court.
Inordinate delay in land acquisition appeals requires valid justification. Mere plea of illiteracy or ignorance is insufficient. Prior compensation awards are not binding precedents unless land similarity is proven. Compensation enhancement must be based on independent valuation evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition lapses under Section 11A of the 1894 Act if the award is not made within two years. Lapse of acquisition occurs automatically by operation of law when statutory conditions are not met. Karnataka High Court.
When delay in payment of the auction balance is caused by factors attributable to the auctioning authority such as dispute resolution, interest cannot be levied on the purchaser. Karnataka High Court.
Once a property is notified as Waqf property under the Waqf Act, the notification is binding on all parties unless challenged within the stipulated time and in the manner prescribed under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Power to appoint and remove the Mutawalli is exclusively vested with the Waqf Board under the Waqf Act. Jurisdiction of the Civil Court in this regard is ousted. Karnataka High Court.
Objection regarding jurisdiction over the subject matter can be raised even in the second appeal. Objection with respect to territorial or local jurisdiction and pecuniary jurisdiction shall be raised at the earliest stage. Karnataka High Court.
Partition. Court cannot appoint an advocate for the purpose of division of the property. Division of property can be done either by a Collector or any Gazetted subordinate of the Collector deputed by him. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Bank, to which property is mortgaged, can file Writ Petition questioning the order cancelling the gift deed in favour of the borrower, to enforce the security interest. Karnataka High Court.
“Once a Waqf is always a Waqf’’ phrase cannot be used to justify adding properties to the Waqf list that were previously excluded. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Failure to challenge gift deeds in favour of other children does not constitute grounds for dismissing an application. Karnataka High Court.
Plea of adverse possession must be proved by independent evidence and the parties cannot depend on the documents of non-contesting parties. Karnataka High Court.
Purchaser of joint family property from one of the co-owners can assert his right under Section 44 of the Transfer of Property Act only to the extent of his vendor’s share though the entire property was sold to him. Karnataka High Court.
Respondent in an appeal can state that finding against him on a particular issue ought to have been in his favour without filing appeal or cross objection. Appellate court cannot reject the plea when cross appeal is not filed. Karnataka High Court.
Accident involving parked and moving vehicle. Foremost obligation/burden is on the owner of the vehicle which is parked on the road and prove that he had indeed complied with the requirement of Section 122 of MV Act. Karnataka High Court.
Statutory body allotting sites by merely mutating names of the allottees in the revenue records without causing execution and registration of title document will not confer any right. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Once award is passed, Land Acquisition Officer becomes functus officio and except carrying out clerical or arithmetical mistakes if any in the award, there cannot be any further re-consideration of the award. Karnataka High Court.
Khatha of property cannot be unilaterally cancelled alleging encroachment of Village Panchayat property without following the procedure under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Removal of Obstructions and Encroachment) Rules. Karnataka High Court.
Non consideration of application for production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 while disposing the appeal is a mistake and an error apparent on the face of the record providing “sufficient reason” for review. Karnataka High Court.
Post of primary school teacher is a ‘civil post’. Only the Administrative Tribunal and not the High Court has jurisdiction to deal with the issue pertaining to the selection. Karnataka High Court.
Acquisition of lands for BMRCL under the KIAD Act. Compensation is payable under the provisions of land acquisition Act, 2013 without deducting the Tax at source under the Income Tax Act. Karnataka High Court.
Writ of mandamus. To meet the ends of justice, Writ Court itself can grant relief to aggrieved persons without relegating them to the authorities. Karnataka High Court.
Societies Registration Act applies to educational institutions run by a religious mutt if the institutions are registered under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for bare injunction is not maintainable when defendant apart from denying title and possession of plaintiff sets-up title to himself. Karnataka High Court.
State or its authorities cannot levy tax on the properties belong to Union of India constructed after the commencement of the Constitution of India in view of Article 285. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. Succession Certificate cannot be issued in respect of immovable property in Karnataka. Authorities cannot insist on production of Succession Certificate for transfer of khata of the property bequeathed under a Will.
“Writ Petition seeking revision of voters list cannot be maintained except by the persons aggrieved.” Karnataka High Court, while dismissing the petition filed by MLA seeking rectification of voters list of his constituency.
Orders and recovery certificates issued by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority are binding and enforceable as arrears of land revenue. The State must identify, attach, and auction the defaulting developer’s assets to satisfy homebuyers’ claims within a reasonable, court-fixed timeframe. Karnataka High Court.
In a suit for declaration, the Court can ‘mould the relief’ to order a partition among the legitimate branches of the lineage. The absence of certain legal heirs as formal parties does not preclude the Court from ordering a partition; their specific entitlements can be adjudicated and protected during the ‘Final Decree’ proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Partnership Act. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties or unless contrary intention appears, the property brought in as a capital contribution or business of a firm by a partner shall be treated as a property of the firm. Karnataka High Court.
A document evidencing the transfer of an interest in immovable property to a partnership firm, towards a partner’s share, does not require compulsory registration under the Registration Act. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. While determining the market value of a leased property, registration authorities cannot rely solely on the guidance value. They are required to consider any restrictive clauses in the lease such as limitations on use, transfer, or enjoyment which may diminish the property’s value in comparison to an unencumbered freehold property. Karnataka High Court.
Representation of the People Act. The non-disclosure of substantial immovable assets in the affidavit constitutes a ‘material non-compliance’. Since the right to know the financial antecedents of a candidate is a fundamental right of the voters, any significant suppression of wealth or property ownership vitiates the election process. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of Property Act. A sale of joint family property executed by a single co-owner, who obtained exclusive mutation of the property in their name through the suppression of other legal heirs, is binding only to the extent of that co-owner’s actual share. A purchaser from such a co-owner does not acquire a valid title over the entire property. Karnataka High Court.
Mohammedan Law. ‘A living person has no heir’. Partition of property among heirs is only possible upon the death of the owner. A living person cannot effect a ‘partition’ of his property with his heirs, as no one is an heir to a living person. Karnataka High Court.
The right of pre-emption under Mahomedan Law requires strict and literal compliance with the dual formalities of Talab-i-Mowasibat and Talab-i-Ishhad. A co-sharer who remains in joint possession and asserts their demand immediately upon the knowledge of a sale to a stranger, while invoking witnesses and offering the same price paid by the stranger, is entitled to a decree of pre-emption. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for declaration. A mere misdescription of a property, such as a wrong survey number in a title deed or a compromise decree, will not vitiate a transaction or negate ownership if the identity of the property is otherwise established by the evidence on record, including boundaries and the clear intent of the parties. Karnataka High Court.
A person who enters upon a property as an agent, caretaker, or agricultural laborer cannot assert ownership against the true owner. Such possession is ‘permissive’ in nature and remains the constructive possession of the owner. Karnataka High Court.
Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC. The discretionary power to permit withdrawal of a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit cannot be invoked where the alleged ‘formal defect’ relates to a mere imperfection in the pleadings which can be cured by way of an amendment to the plaint. Karnataka High Court.
In a suit for cancellation of a sale deed where the deed itself reflects the property’s value, the court fee must be paid ad valorem on that stated value. Valuation based on land assessment applies only when no material exists to determine market value. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Excise (General Condition of Licences) Rules. A legal heir can claim transfer of an excise licence only if the licence was valid and subsisting on the date of the original licence holder’s death. A lapsed or expired licence cannot be revived through renewal to create such a right. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acqusition Act. A final notification is unsustainable if the State Government fails to duly consider the report submitted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 5A(2) and the objections filed by the landowners. The preliminary notification may remain valid, allowing the State to restart the acquisition process from the stage of Section 5A. Karnataka High Court.
‘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 tripple muder case.
Title in immovable property cannot be created solely through a ‘varadhi’ (report) or revenue entries. The presumption of truth attached to revenue entries is rebuttable and can be nullified by producing valid, legally acceptable evidence, such as a deed of sale. Karnataka High Court.
A will bequeathing property for which occupancy rights were granted under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act is deemed to be an ‘alienation’ and is invalid if it violates a statutory condition of non-alienation attached to the grant of those rights. The property vests with the State Government free from all encumbrances. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Married daughters are entitled to share in tenanted lands for which occupancy rights were granted to their father, as the grant benefits all legal heirs. The definition of word ‘family’ in Section 2 (12) would not be a bar to claim share in the said property. Karnataka High Court.
‘’Doctrine of lost grant’’ is a legal fiction developed to confer title by prescription, even when a right cannot be established through immemorial use. The presumption of a lost grant is not absolute unless the right originated legally, was exercised openly and peacefully, and was valid and enforceable against all. Karnataka High Court.
If a vendor refuses to register a sale deed that has already been executed, the appropriate remedy is to seek registration under the Registration Act. A suit for specific performance seeking such relief is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
The burden to prove that a Will was properly executed, including the testator’s signature as required lies fully on the person who relies on the Will. While appellate court can adjust relief to account for later developments to ensure justice, it will not accept late efforts to bring in additional evidence unless it is backed by necessary foundational material. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur celebrates his 56th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur: Born on 21.06.1970. Enrolled as an Advocate on 30.05.1997.
Practiced in the field of Constitutional law, Labour Laws, Company Laws, Intellectual Property, Penal Laws, Banking Laws, Negotiable Instrument Laws, Property Laws, Consumer Protection Laws, Service law, House Rent Laws, Family Laws, Land Acquisition, Economic Offence Laws, Education Law before High Court of Karnataka, Punjab and Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.
Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 11.11.2019 and Permanent Judge on 08.09.2021.
Important judgments delivered by Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur. N.I. Act. Cheque issued to managing partner of partnership firm. Complaint filed in the name of partnership firm not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Penal Code. Section 304A. There must be a direct nexus between death of a person and rash and negligent act of accused. Death due to electrocution. Criminal negligence against Section officer of the electric company not proved. Karnataka High Court.
Writ Jurisdiction. Petition under Article 226 would NOT lie for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus for tracing missing persons. Only in cases of illegal detention or custody, such writ can be issued. Karnataka High Court.
Judicial review. A rule cannot be challenged on grounds of individual hardship. Courts cannot question wisdom behind policy decisions. Karnataka High Court upholds Rule increasing age limit of doctors for posts of General Duty Medical Officers.
Judicial review. Look Out Circular issued by Bank against debtor in larger public interest and economic interest of the nation cannot be the subject matter of judicial scrutiny. National interest is paramount. Karnataka High Court.
‘Perjury has become a way of life in the Law Courts.’ – Karnataka High Court while dismissing appeal arising out of a false claim under the Motor Vehicles Act with exemplary costs.
Electricity Supply. Purchaser of industry is liable to pay arrears towards electricity supply to earlier owner. However, there shall be apportionment of purchaser’s liability when only a part of industry is purchased. Karnataka High Court.
Bank loans. One Time Settlement. Once the OTS payment is made by the principal borrower, the surety is also discharged. Law on One Time Settlement discussed. Karnataka High Court.
Bar under Section 132 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act does not apply to a suit where the very jurisdiction of the Land Tribunal to grant occupancy rights is questioned. Karnataka High Court.
Employees Compensation Act, 1923. Section 4A(3)(a). Interest at 12% per annum shall be awarded from the date of the accident and not after expiry of thirty days thereafter. Karnataka High Court.
RTE Act. Government has no power to conduct examinations of its own other than the regular examinations conducted by the schools. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST PTCL Act. Delay of 20 years in applying for cancellation of the sale. Such application cannot be entertained by the authorities. Karnataka High Court.
We are living in different times, of terrorism. ‘’Bail is a rule & jail is an exception’’ has spent itself when it comes to acts of terrorism. Karnataka High Court reject bail plea of accused involved in ‘K.G.Halli Riots’.
Transfer of license for distribution of essential commodities is governed by the Control Order prevalent at the time of grant of license. Restrictions imposed in the subsequent Order cannot be applied. Karnataka High Court.
Statutory authority cannot take away property of the Citizen without paying compensation. Karnataka High Court directs conveyance of the alternate property.
Fair price shop. Compassionate allotment of licence on the ground of death of authorized original dealer. Control Order of 2016 and 2021 would not be applicable for the licenses issued earlier. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Renewal of permit is a privilege and preferential right of permit holders which shall be considered within a stipulated time failing which deemed renewal kicks in. Karnataka High Court.
‘’It is the duty of the State to take care of the widows and children of ex-servicemen who served this country’’. Karnataka High Court directs proper consideration of application for grant of land by widow of soldier.
Government Advocate has only fiduciary relation with the Government and cannot claim the benefit of forcing the Government to continue his services if the Government does not wish to do so. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC. Procedure in case of assignment before final order in suit applies even to a suit for permanent injunction. Karnataka High Court.
When property is transferred by way of a registered document, Revenue authorities are duty bound to make entry in the revenue records/mutation records without application of the parties. Karnataka High Court.
Party whose presence would enable the Court to completely and effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit can be impleaded though no specific relief is sought against such party. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition Act of 2013. There is no bar for the land-loser to make an application even after the period of thirty days for reference under Section 64. Karnataka High Court.
When once the tenanted land is vested with the State Government under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, the same cannot be subsequently declared as Wakf property. Karnataka High Court.
’Direction to mutate name of Government in respect of private property, without following due process of law, is illegal’. Karnataka High Court orders restoration of the owner’s name in the revenue records.
Cr.P.C. Inherent power to recall judgment applies only in cases of lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, or denial of natural justice. Karnataka High Court.
Change of khata in respect of a purchased site cannot be refused on the ground that the original layout is unauthorised and illegal or that the site falls within the park or other civic area. Karnataka High Court.
A preliminary notification for land acquisition could be quashed if the authorities fail to proceed with the acquisition process within a reasonable time, even if the law does not prescribe a specific time limit. A reasonable period for issuing the final notification is two years. Karnataka High Court.
Labour Law. A Certified Standing Order or condition of service, specifically the age of superannuation, cannot be unilaterally amended by the Certifying Officer during the subsistence of a binding settlement that prohibits the raising of demands involving additional financial burden. Karnataka High Court.
Industrial Disputes Act. A bipartite settlement under Section 18(1) is binding only on the parties to the agreement and does not bind other workers who belong to a separate, non-signatory Union. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXXVII of the CPC. Summary suit. The issuance of summons in the specific format prescribed in Form No. 4-A of Appendix B is a mandatory requirement and not a mere technicality. A general summons issued in an ordinary format cannot set the summary clock in motion against the defendant. Karnataka High Court.
Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC. The production of a document is a procedural step distinct from its admission or proof in evidence. Since, mere production of a document does not amount to its proof and the opposing party retains the right to object to its marking or admissibility at the relevant stage of the trial, the Court should allow such application to ensure that all relevant material is available for a just decision on the merits of the case. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Police Act. An externment order must follow a structured procedure, which includes serving the person with a written notice of the allegations, granting a reasonable opportunity to respond, and allowing him to engage legal counsel and present witnesses. Karnataka High Court.
Grant of ad-interim ex-parte order of temporary injunction must comply with the mandatory requirement of the Proviso to Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the CPC, which obligates the Court to record specific reasons for its opinion that the object of granting the injunction would be defeated by delaying the issuance of notice to the opposite party. The failure to record such reasons renders the order unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
An order of externment is an extraordinary measure that restricts a citizen’s fundamental right to freedom of movement; therefore, it cannot be passed on the basis of vague or ‘omnibus’ allegations. Failure to meet the mandatory requirements renders the externment order arbitrary and liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued towards refund of advance sale consideration upon the failure to execute the sale deed, attracts the provisions of the Act. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 139-146
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad celebrates his 60th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harekoppa Thimmana Gowda Narendra Prasad: Born on 1st June 1966. Studied B.Sc., from D.V.S.College, Shivamoga in the year 1990 and LL.B., from Vidyavardhaka Law College, Mysuru in the year 1993.
Enrolled as an Advocate in the High Court of Karnataka in the year 1993. Started Practice in the Chambers of Prof. Ravivarma Kumar.
Initially for a period of two years practiced in Trial Courts, Bengaluru.
Practiced in the field of Constitutional Law, Service Law, administrative Law, Public Law, Property Law, Arbitration and Conciliation mattes, Environmental Law, Revenue Matters, Company matters, Banking Laws, Civil and Criminal matters before the High Court of Karnataka, Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal and Central Administrative Tribunal.
Appointed as High Court Government Pleader in the year 2006 till 2013 and as Additional Government Advocate from 2013 till the date of elevation, i.e., 2018.
Appointed as an Additional Judge, High Court of Karnataka on 02.06.2018 and as Permanent Judge on 26.02.2020.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad.
Issuance of fifteen days notice for moving no confidence motion under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules is mandatory. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2002. Right of appeal under Section 16 (1) is conferred on both sides and not confined only to senior citizen and parents. Karnataka High Court.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Order passed under Section 12 can be enforced in the same manner as laid down under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 147. Person travelling on mud-guard of a tractor is NOT an authorized passenger. Persons working on ploughing/crushing machines attached to tractor are NOT employees. Karnataka High Court.
Law of precedent. Observations made by the court must be read in context in which they appear to have been stated. The judgments of the courts are not to be construed as statutes. Karnataka High Court.
Tax laws. Interpretation. There is no equity about tax. No presumption as to tax. Nothing to be read in. Nothing to be implied except the actual language used. Karnataka High Court.
Technical objection which defeats justice should be discouraged. If infraction of procedural provision does not provide for any consequences such a provision has to be construed as directory and not mandatory.
“Removing minor girl from the lawful custody of parents is clear case of kidnap”. Karnataka High Court convicts the accused while confirming his acquittal for the offence under the POCSO Act.
“Interest of the child is paramount in cases under the POCSO Act and the Court cannot appreciate the evidence on sentimental values.” Karnataka High Court sets aside the acquittal of the sexual offender.
Civil suit barred by limitation touches the very jurisdiction of the court. Even a compromise decree cannot be passed by the original or appellate court in such a proceeding. Karnataka High Court.
MV Act. When the income declared by a person engaged in a profession or business is not stable, in order to assess the income, the average of the income of the years considered would be appropriate. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Widow who is remarried after the succession opened due to the death of her husband is entitled to a share in her late husband’s properties. Karnataka High Court.
Purchaser cannot maintain a civil suit against the land acquisition body (BDA) for declaration and injunction when the acquisition proceedings are already completed. Karnataka High Court.
Civil suit for injunction against acquiring body in respect of property acquired under a statute is not maintainable and is barred under Section 9 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Even the suo motu proceedings for resumption of alienated lands can be initiated only within the reasonable time. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Panchayat Act. Adhyaksha of Zilla Panchayats can interfere with an order or resolution of the Grama Panchayat only when the Adhyaksha of the Panchayat makes a reference to him. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal Corporation cannot insist on probate of a Hindu Will for change of khata since the Will executed by Hindus are not covered by Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57 of the Indian Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
To enforce right of pre-emption, the suit has to be filed within one year from the date of registration of the instrument. Suit for specific performance cannot be filed to avoid limitation issue. Karnataka High Court.
Court can pass an exparte order appointing a court commissioner under Order XXVI Rules 1 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Code in an intellectual property rights case. Karnataka High Court.
A dispute arising out of a Share Purchase Agreement does not amount to a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Such matters should be adjudicated by a regular civil court and not by a Commercial Court. Karnataka High Court.
Trial court has no power to determine stamp duty and penalty on insufficiently stamped documents. Such matters must be referred to the District Registrar, who alone has the power to assess and certify compliance. Karnataka High Court.
Objections regarding pecuniary jurisdiction of trial court can be raised in an appeal against an interlocutory order when the suit is still pending. Bar under Section 21 of CPC applies only to appeals against final judgment and decree. Karnataka High Court.
Statements made by an employee to the press in public interest are protected under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Such expressions do not warrant dismissal unless they are knowingly false or disruptive. Karnataka High Court.
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act. Where service rules do not provide for an appeal, the aggrieved party may file an appeal under Rule 11 of the Rules framed under the Act. A writ petition is not maintainable in such circumstances. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik T celebrates his 51st birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik Thavaryanaik: Born on 01.06.1975. Native of Chitradurga. Completed B.A.L., L.L.B., from SJM Law College, Chitradurga and secured 3rd Rank. Obtained L.L.M. from Kuvempu University, Shivamogga. Enrolled as Advocate and practiced at Chitradurga. Appointed as District Judge on 02.01.2012. Served as Registrar (Administration) at High Court. Worked at Prl. Secretary to Government, Law Department. Worked as Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Udupi & Bengaluru Rural District.
Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 24.01.2023.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik.
“Speedy trial in NIA cases guarantees the fundamental right under Article 21”. Karnataka High Court directs establishment of three more Special to ensure speedy trial and disposal of the NIA cases.
Karnataka High Court directs amendment of Section 377 IPC to include Necrophilia on the lines of laws prevalent in UK, Canada, NZ etc. Guidelines issued to install CCTVs in mortuaries and to maintain Mortuary hygiene.
Mere act of insulting a person would not satisfy the ingredients of Section 504, IPC. There must be intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under Section 306 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Additional accused can be added under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the conviction and sentence is pronounced as otherwise the Court gets divested of its power. Karnataka High Court.
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.
Mere expression of words without any intention to cause alarm or cause to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do does not constitute criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Mere use of words ‘Investigating Officer is directed to conduct the investigation’ without applying the judicious mind, does not amount to permission by the Magistrate to take up the investigation for a non-cognizable offence. Karnataka High Court.
Advocates must practice Seven Lamps of Advocacy. Making false allegations against the Presiding Officer cannot be countenanced for transfer of case under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
Mere act of insulting a person would not satisfy the ingredients of Section 504, IPC. There must be intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under Section 306 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Additional accused can be added under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the conviction and sentence is pronounced as otherwise the Court gets divested of its power. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Deletion of certain lands from the acquisition based on objective, rational considerations, including areas that had already been converted for non-agricultural use, extensively developed localities, nurseries, religious institutions, and lands already acquired for other Government projects etc cannot be a ground to challenge the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Failure to include land in the preliminary notification and denial of the right to file objections vitiates the entire acquisition proceedings. Arbitrary exclusion or inclusion of lands in the acquisition process is discriminatory and unlawful. Karnataka High Court.
A General Power of Attorney duly executed and notarized carries a presumption of validity under Section 85 of the Indian Evidence Act. Mere execution of a cancellation deed and its registration under Book IV of the Registration Act does not amount to constructive notice to third parties. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. A suspension order cannot be sustained if it is based solely on a criminal case that has been quashed. Continued suspension, in the absence of periodic review is illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Judgment on admission. A suit can be dismissed on the basis of admissions if they are unequivocal and leave no further dispute regarding the material facts in the case. Admissions regarding the validity of a family settlement in a compromise petition falls within the ambit of Order XII Rule 6 CPC. Karnataka High Court.
”Even if disobedience of a court order is undisputed, the court may consider a defence of impossibility to comply and refrain from initiating contempt proceedings if enforcement is deemed impossible”. Karnataka High Court accepts substantial compliance regarding restoration of forest lands in the revenue records.
Constructive Resjudicata. To invoke Order II Rule 2 CPC and to reject the plaint, there should be intentional relinquishment of claim in the earlier suit. Karnataka High Court.
“No breaking of link’’. In a criminal trial based entirely on circumstantial evidence, the Court cannot sustain a conviction for murder based on inadmissible statements and weak circumstantial links that do not exclude the hypothesis of innocence. Karnataka High Court.
‘Uninformed legitimization of trivialities would make a mockery of administration of criminal justice.’ Where the testimony of the primary witness reveals a pre-planned attempt to falsely implicate the accused in coordination with the Police, the evidence loses its credibility, and the accused is entitled to an acquittal. Karnataka High Court.
Dowry death. A conviction cannot rest solely on medical evidence of homicidal death without a credible link showing cruelty soon before death. Where interested witnesses give materially contradictory statements unsupported by independent evidence, statutory presumptions cannot be invoked. If dowry allegations are vague and the prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Karnataka High Court.
Companies Act 1956. The Court will not interfere with a Scheme of Arrangement approved by an overwhelming majority unless it is patently illegal, fraudulent, or based on a perverse valuation; pending misfeasance proceedings or minority share disputes do not bar sanction of an otherwise viable scheme. Karnataka High Court.
“Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited is sitting on a huge land bank without much progress’’. Karnataka High Court directs the State Government to bring fresh planning by discarding the Framework Agreement at the earliest.
The development of townships adjacent to a major infrastructure corridor is considered an integral and inseparable part of the ‘public purpose’ of the project. Once the overarching validity of an infrastructure project and its land requirements have been upheld by the Supreme Court, individual challenges to specific land parcels on the same grounds are barred by the principles of finality of litigation. Karnataka High Court.
Trademarks Act. A company in liquidation loses its proprietary rights and goodwill over a trade mark when it has been continuously out of use for a long period. Its non-use is not covered by ‘special circumstances’ under Section 47(3). Karnataka High Court.
A lease renewal or extension clause is not absolute and cannot be specifically enforced where it expressly makes renewal subject to the lessor’s consent. If the landlord refuses consent after the original term expires, the tenancy lawfully ends and the tenant’s continued possession becomes unlawful. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Lokayukta Act. Chairman of a government company is a ‘public servant’ under the Act. The collective nature of board decisions does not absolve the Chairman of responsibility for ensuring adherence to statutory rules. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Money Laundering Act. A transaction concerning a corporate asset that is already under liquidation, executed by a promoter or director without lawful title or authority, and undertaken in circumstances demonstrating absence of good faith, is liable to be declared void. Karnataka High Court.
A Court Order obtained by misleading the court cannot be the basis for initiating contempt proceedings for its non-compliance. Such order cannot be given effect to and no contempt can be said to have been committed by its non-compliance. Karnataka High Court.
Properties mortgaged to a Bank as collateral security, and acquired prior to the alleged offenses, do not constitute ‘proceeds of crime’ under the PMLA. The attachment of such properties undermines the Bank’s rights as a secured creditor to recover public money under the SARFAESI Act, especially if the Bank was not issued notice under Section 8 of the PMLA. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Appellate Tribunal does not possess the inherent power to remand a case back to the Adjudicating Authority. The Appellate Tribunal is a creature of Statute with limited, specifically conferred powers, and the Act does not explicitly vest the power of remand in the Appellate Tribunal. Karnataka High Court.
A land grant made by the Government for a specific purpose with right of resumption does not constitute a full alienation or sale of the land. Neither a mortgage of these limited rights nor the winding-up of the grantee company extinguishes the Government’s power of resumption. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Deletion of certain lands from the acquisition based on objective, rational considerations, including areas that had already been converted for non-agricultural use, extensively developed localities, nurseries, religious institutions, and lands already acquired for other Government projects etc cannot be a ground to challenge the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai K celebrates his 52nd birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai Kallangala: Born on 01.06.1974. Completed primary education at Kepu & secondary education & PUC at Vitla. Completed Degree from St. Philomina’s College. Completed LL.B., from Vivekananda Law College, Puttur. Enrolled as Advocate in 1999 and practiced in the office of Sri G. Balakrishna Shastri and Sri Younus Ali Khan. Later joined the office of Hon’ble shri Justice John Michael D’Cunha. Worked as Government Pleader for 2 years. Served as Central Government Senior Panel Counsel for 6 years. Functioned as Special Public Prosecutor for Enforcement Directorate, and Narcotics Control Bureau. Served as Panel Advocate for BDA. Practiced mainly on criminal side.
Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 09.02.2023.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai.
IPC. Section 306. To constitute the offence under Section 306, IPC, the accused must have played an active role by act of instigation or doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC can be considered only at the time of hearing of appeal on merits so as to find out whether the additional evidence has any relevance/bearing on the issues involved. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal trial. Denying cross-examination violates a person’s life and liberty which are not only fundamental rights but also basic human rights. Karnataka High Court.
Service law. In the absence of clear proof based on the evidence of witnesses in the enquiry, an adverse presumption cannot be drawn on the guilt of the accused. Karnataka High Court sets aside compulsory retirement on corruption charges.
Standalone distilleries established for manufacturing ethanol are not governed by the provisions of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966. Karnataka High Court.
”Purpose of acquisition is relevant factor in determining the compensation’’. Karnataka High Court enhances compensation from Rs. 750 to Rs. 2000 for the land acquired for Court complex.
Conviction for the offence under Section 366A Procuration of minor girl for illicit sexual intercourse must be fortified by sufficient evidence and reasons when the offence of rape not proved. Karnataka High Court.
When the prosecution fails to prove its case, benefit of the acquittal can be extended by the appellate court even to the accused who has not preferred appeal challenging the order of conviction. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. Though due to passage of time and memory loss, witnesses deviate from their Police Statements, but when such discrepancies make the foundation of the prosecution case shaky, the Court has to take strict note thereof. Karnataka High Court.
If deposition of the child witness inspires confidence in the mind of the Court and there is no improvement or tutoring, the Court may rely upon the same. Karnataka High Court.
In determining culpable homicide under Section 299 of IPC, mentality of the accused, nature of the act and its effect upon the victim have to be analysed. Karnataka High Court.
When accused are acquitted for the offences under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, conviction for the murder cannot be sustained. Karnataka High Court.
Lack of intention on the part of the accused and commission of the act in the heat of passion upon sudden quarrel are the mitigating circumstances. Karnataka High Court reduces sentence from Section 302 IPC to Section 304.
Criminal Law. When trial Court misreads the evidence and arrives at a conclusion erroneously to convict the accused, the appellate Court must intervene to prevent miscarriage of justice. Karnataka High Court.
Reference Court while awarding compensation in respect of the sub-soil/minerals underneath the soil of the acquired properties shall take into consideration the provisions of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules. Karnataka High Court.
Freedom fighters’ pension. The proof required must be as provided in the pension scheme itself. As long as such proof was not available, the benefit cannot be granted. Karnataka High Court, while following the Supreme Court Judgment.
Criminal law. To impose the extreme punishment, all the three tests; Crime test, Criminal test and Rarest rare test must be satisfied. Karnataka High Court converts imprisonment till last breath of life to life imprisonment.
Criminal Law. Subsequent voluntary statement of the accused cannot be admissible in evidence and recovery to that effect amounts to “rediscovery of a fact already disclosed and capable of discovery.” Karnataka High Court.
Cheque issued by vendor to purchaser of property as security towards pending litigation on the property is not ‘legally enforceable debt’. Karnataka High Court.
Presumption of innocence is a human right. Mere recovery of the tainted money, dehorse the circumstances under which it was found, is not sufficient for conviction under the PC Act when the substantive evidence is not proved. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention under the Goonda Act. Failure to furnish translated copies of the documents to the detenue renders the detention unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Contributory negligence cannot be attributed to victim riding vehicle simply because he did not have driving license and insurance, especially when he was riding on the correct side of the road. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act,1988. Tribunal or Court should not apply the split multiplier in routine course and multiplier should be applied. An injured or the legal representatives of the deceased should not be deprived from getting a just compensation. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Tribble riding on a two-wheeler itself is not a ground to avoid insurance liability unless it is established that the tribble riding was the cause for the accident to attribute contributory negligence. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Court cannot sit on perceptivity of the State Government in posting a person to a particular post except considering the eligibility of the person to occupy the post. Karnataka High Court.
Failure to furnish legible and translated copies of the documents supporting the preventive detention to the detune vitiates the detention order. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. Proceedings regarding escaped assessment and notices under Section 153C solely based on loose sheets and documents which are termed as ‘diaries’ found during the search are unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
It is not always mandatory for the State Government to script the reasons for transfer of public servant when the reasonings are reflected in the records for obtaining prior-approval from the Chief Minister. Karnataka High Court.
A suit seeking a declaration regarding matrimonial status, whether affirmative or negative, falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Family Court under Section 7(1)(b) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The nature of relief sought does not affect maintainability, and Civil Courts are barred from entertaining such suits. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. A conviction under Section 302 IPC can be upheld without an independent eyewitness if res gestae witnesses, forensic evidence, and motive prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Testimony from the deceased’s family cannot be dismissed for bias, and minor contradictions or hostile witnesses do not weaken a well-supported prosecution case. Karnataka High Court.
State Financial Corporation Act. In proceedings under Sections 31 and 32, where the enforcement of a surety’s liability is sought, the court’s investigation is primarily limited to determining the validity of the financial corporation’s claim. Karnataka High Court.
A suit for specific performance cannot be decreed if the plaintiff acknowledges the contract’s termination by the defendant, unless the plaintiff also seeks and proves that the termination was invalid. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act. DNA evidence alone, though having evidentiary value under Section 45 of the Evidence Act, cannot establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt without corroborative testimony, especially when the prosecutrix denies the incident. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. A son born after a father receives ancestral property in a partition is entitled to a share in that property as his birth reconstitutes the coparcenary, unless the property was alienated before his birth. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. A suit against the State or its officers regarding entries in revenue records is expressly barred by Section 135. Such a suit is liable to be rejected at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code for not disclosing cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Natural justice requires that a delinquent officer be given notice and an opportunity to represent before the Disciplinary Authority records its final findings and imposes a penalty. No such hearing is required at the stage of merely recording disagreement with the Inquiry Officer’s findings. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Departmental proceedings initiated against a retired government servant more than four years after the date of the event are void and barred by limitation. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Devolution of a deceased Hindu male’s separate self-acquired property must be governed by the general rules of succession under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act which mandates that the widow and all children, being Class I heirs, are entitled to equal shares in the property. Coparcenary principles under Section 6 of the Act do not apply to such separate property. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Lokayukta Act 1984. The Lokayukta has no authority under the Act to adjudicate questions of right, title, or interest in property; such issues can be determined only in appropriate civil proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Electricity Act 2003. Inter-State transmission of electricity under Section 11 can be regulated not only by the Central Government but also by the State Government in an extraordinary circumstance, arising in the public interest. Karnataka High Court.
“Even the most solemn proceedings stand vitiated if they are actuated by fraud.’’ Karnataka High Court imposes exemplary costs on a litigant for pursuing fraudulent claims and dragging the dispute on for more than a decade.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Assistant Commissioner cannot cancel a land grant if the validity of the grant has already been adjudicated and upheld by a Tribunal. Administrative or quasi-judicial authorities cannot exercise statutory powers to override the finality of orders passed by a superior forum. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for declaration and injunction. Failure of the plaintiff to establish absolute title does not automatically result in the dismissal of the suit for injunction. If the plaintiff proves ‘settled possession’ through continuous revenue entries and long-standing occupation, he is entitled to an injunction. Karnataka High Court.
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. There is no bar to entertain an appeal even after expiry of 180 days. Karnataka High Court.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. A victim cannot file second appeal against the order of acquittal either under Section 413 or by seeking special leave under Section 419 since affirming order of acquittal by the Appellate Court is final and not subject to review. Karnataka High Court.
Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act. Failure to maintain required documentation and operating prohibited machine cannot be termed as mere procedural lapse. Such violation of basic fundamental requisite amounts to dishonest, fraudulent and can be termed intentional. Karnataka High Court refuses to quash criminal proceedings under the Act.
Karnataka Police Act. For non-cognizable offences, the police cannot initiate an investigation or file a charge-sheet without strict adherence to Section 155(1) and 155(2). The informant must be referred to the Magistrate, and the Magistrate must pass a reasoned, explicit order permitting the investigation, rather than a mere endorsement, otherwise, the entire proceedings are invalid and must be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
‘Rashness and negligence are multi-faceted concepts which cannot be comprehended and interpreted in isolation’. Mere driving of vehicle in high speed neither amounts to negligence nor rashness in itself. Karnataka High Court.
“Digital arrest has shaken the country’s economic system, causing substantial financial loss to both educated and illiterate people. Such offences require greater care and caution in the interest of society at large”. Karnataka High Court rejects the plea for anticipatory bail of the accused.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Claim over land by adverse possession and also as a tenant under the Act are mutually destructive pleas which disentitles the person from the grant of occupancy rights under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
When a married women willingly engages in a longterm sexual relationship with another man, fully aware of its nature and without any cogent evidence to show that such relationship was induced by misconception of facts or false promise of marriage made in bad faith from the inception, the man cannot be held guilty of rape under Section 376 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman celebrates her 60th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman: Born on 25.5.1966 at Ernakulam. Educated at St.Teresa`s Convent Girls High School and St. Teresa`s College and later at Maharaja`s College, Ernakulam. Graduated in English Literature in 1986 and completed Diploma in Journalism from Kerala Press Academy in 1987. Obtained Law Degree from Government Law College, Ernakulam. Enrolled as an Advocate on 09.03.1991. Served as Standing Counsel for the Corporation of Cochin from 2001 to 2010, Senior Government Pleader from January 2007 and Special Government Pleader (Co-operation) during 2010-2011. Sworn in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Kerala on 10.04.2015. Appointed as Permanent Judge of the High Court of Kerala with effect from 05-04-2017.
Her Ladyship was transferred as a Judge of Karnataka High Court and assumed office on 21.03.2024.
State Financial Corporation Act. In proceedings under Sections 31 and 32, where the enforcement of a surety’s liability is sought, the court’s investigation is primarily limited to determining the validity of the financial corporation’s claim. Karnataka High Court.
When an alternate site is allotted due to the fault of the BDA, interest on differential sital value is chargeable only from the date of legal challenge, not from the original allotment. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. Sole legatee, by necessary implication can act as an executor of a Will and can apply for grant probate of Will. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. If an award is not passed within two years under Section 11A, the acquisition lapses. Pendency of litigation does not extend the period unless a stay order is in effect. A lapsed acquisition creates a fresh cause of action for legal challenge. Karnataka High Court.fvg
Intra-court writ appeals are maintainable when challenging administrative or statutory orders, even if the party invokes Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The power exercised in such cases falls under Article 226. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Telegraph Act. Mere laying of high-tension power transmission lines over private land does not amount to land acquisition but constitutes a statutory right of user. Disputes over sufficiency of compensation must be adjudicated under Section 16(3) by the District Judge, not through writ jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Land Tribunal has power to rectify and correct the extent of land in an order passed by it after causing actual measurement and after giving an opportunity of being heard to the concerned parties. Karnataka High Court.
Disposal of corner sites. ‘Power of the BDA to accept or reject auction bid without explanation is traceable to a Rule which is not under challenge.’ Karnataka High Court upholds rejection of the auction bid.
An order refusing or granting ex-parte interim measure on an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act falling under ‘Commercial Arbitration Dispute’ is appealable order under Section 37 of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Limitation to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894. Cause of action arises only after the conclusion of the proceedings under Section 30 of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
‘’Mubarat’’ is a form of divorce by mutual consent recognized by Muslim Personal Law. Family courts are duty-bound to accept the Mubarat agreement between the parties to dissolve the marriage. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. In commercial arbitration matters, delay in filing appeals under Section 37 can be condoned only by way of exception and not as a rule. ‘Sufficient cause’ is not flexible so as to cover long delays, which are beyond the period provided for in the appeal. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for an Arbitrator to determine. Even if such interpretation gives rise to an erroneous application of law, the Courts will generally not interfere, unless the error is palpably perverse or illegal and goes to the root of the matter. (Ref). Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Devolution of a deceased Hindu male’s separate self-acquired property must be governed by the general rules of succession under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act which mandates that the widow and all children, being Class I heirs, are entitled to equal shares in the property. Coparcenary principles under Section 6 of the Act do not apply to such separate property. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. If the Land Acquisition Officer fails to justify the award or prove the relied-upon sale statistics, the court must reassess the market value on the basis of the claimant’s evidence, including non-agricultural potential. Where comparable sales are prior or subsequent to the preliminary notification, escalation or de-escalation may be applied to arrive at a fair value, particularly for land with high development potential. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Partnership Act. The bar on suits by an unregistered firm under Section 69(2) does not apply to a suit seeking a permanent injunction against passing off or misuse of a trade name, as this right arises from common law/tort and not from the contract of partnership. A plaint seeking such an injunction cannot be rejected on the ground of the firm’s non-registration. Karnataka High Court.
Electricity Act 2003. Inter-State transmission of electricity under Section 11 can be regulated not only by the Central Government but also by the State Government in an extraordinary circumstance, arising in the public interest. Karnataka High Court.
Challenge to land acquisition. Writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised to resolve complex disputes regarding title or allegations of fraud in previous settlements, as such matters involve disputed questions of fact that must be adjudicated in a properly instituted civil suit. Claims brought after an inordinate delay are liable to be rejected on the grounds of delay and laches. Karnataka High Court.
The commercial nature of the transaction such as leasing premises for a retail store takes precedence over the general classification of the matter as a landlord-tenant dispute. Such suits must be adjudicated exclusively by Commercial Courts to fulfill the legislative intent of providing a specialized and time-bound mechanism for resolving business-related litigations. Karnataka High Court.
Habeas Corpus. Custody of child with father cannot be termed as illegal detention since the issue can be considered by a competent Family Court. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention. Failure to specifically state the grounds of detention in the Detention Order vitiates the exercise of preventive detention. Preventive detention cannot be invoked merely on the existence of pending criminal cases, particularly when the allegations are capable of being effectively addressed under the ordinary criminal law. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention is advised to assert/afford protection to society. Courts cannot sit as an Appellate Court on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. A sole beneficiary of a Will can be considered an executor by necessary implication. His application for probate is maintainable even if he is not explicitly named as the executor in the Will. Karnataka High Court.
In a partition suit involving a Christian family, succession must be determined under the Indian Succession Act, and the coparcenary principles under the Hindu Succession Act have no application. Where an intestate dies leaving only children, the property is to be divided equally among all surviving children. Karnataka High Court.
Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules. An allottee of a site forfeits his right to the allotment if he fails to deposit the full sital value within the period stipulated. The Court cannot direct the BDA to accept such payment and execute the sale deed years after the stipulated period has expired. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act. ‘Deposit’ under Section 2(2) is widely inclusive, covering any money received by a financial establishment to be returned with benefit, unless it is proven to fall within the Act’s seven specific exceptions. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. An order passed by an Arbitral Tribunal that merely resolves an incidental factual or procedural issue such as the validity of an authorization to sign an agreement without conclusively determining a substantive claim or a jurisdictional challenge, does not constitute an ‘interim award’. Such an order cannot be challenged under Section 34 of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
When a non-executant seeks declaration that the sale deed is null or void and does not bind on him, he has to merely pay court fee on the value of the reliefs sought and not ad valorem court-fee on the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deeds. Karnataka High Court.
Specific Relief Act. Where the executant of a deed wants it to be annulled, he has to seek cancellation of the deed. But if a non-executant seeks annulment of a deed, he has to seek a declaration that the deed is invalid, or non est, or illegal or that it is not binding on him. (Referred) Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. The time limit of two years to initiate proceedings for undervaluation cannot be defeated by a technical contention that the exercise of calling for the document had been done by the District Registrar within two years. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. When the market value is determined based on sale deeds that were executed prior to the issuance of the preliminary notification, the principle of ‘annual escalation’ must be applied to account for the appreciation in land value during the intervening period. Guidance value cannot always be the basis. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. A probate court cannot act as a court of title and reject an application for Letters of Administration on the ground that the applicant failed to produce ‘proof of title’ or exhaustive details regarding the ownership of the properties. Karnataka High Court.
Rejection of plaint. A plaintiff cannot selectively challenge a recent transaction while ignoring the foundational registered sale deeds executed by the predecessors-in-title decades earlier; failure to challenge the root of the title within the prescribed period renders any subsequent challenge to the derivative title barred by limitation. Karnataka High Court.
A suit for partition coupled with a prayer for cancellation of a sale deed is required to be instituted within the period of three years under Articles 58 and 59 of the Limitation Act. Where the suit is instituted beyond the period of limitation, the plaint is liable to be rejected as being barred by law. Karnataka High Court.
When an alternate site is allotted due to the fault of the BDA, interest on differential sital value is chargeable only from the date of legal challenge, not from the original allotment. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Nawaz celebrates his 61st birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Nawaz: Born on 22nd May 1965. Completed primary education at St. Francis Xavier’s Primary School, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, High School at St. Philomena’s High School, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, Bachelor’s Degree in Science at St. Philomena’s College, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada and LL.B. at Sri Jagadguru Renukacharya Law College, Bengaluru.
Enrolled as Advocate on 20.04.1990. Appointed as Government Pleader in the year 2003. Appointed as Special Prosecutor for Lokayukta in the year 2007. Appointed as Addl. State Public Prosecutor and worked from 2008-2012.
Appointed as State Public Prosecutor in June, 2015. Represented the Mangalore City Corporation and Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation.
Appointed as Addl. Judge, High Court of Karnataka on 02.06.2018 and permanent Judge on 26.02.2020.
Important judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammed Nawaz.
Sections 407 & 408 Cr.P.C. Case and counter case have to be tried together by the same court irrespective of the nature of offences involved to avoid conflicting judgments over the same incident. Karnataka High Court.
IPC. Section 498A. General and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the complainant’s husband are forced to undergo trial. Karnataka High Court.
Owner/driver of private vehicle from which ganja was seized cannot plead absence of ”conscious possession” since the standard of ‘conscious possession’ is different in case of private vehicle with few persons known to one another. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. At the stage of considering discharge application, Court cannot hold mini trial or go deep into probative value of material on record. Karnataka High Court.
Cr.P.C. Section 482. Quashing of non-compoundable cases. Guiding factor is as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power, both the ultimate consequences may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitrary freezing of bank account by the authorities, unless there is a strong suspicion against the account holder, adversely affects the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Cr.P.C. Section 200. Magistrate can not refer complaint for investigation to Police under Section 156, after taking cognizance of the offence. After taking cognizance, he can not revert back. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Acceptance of B report can NOT be done mechanically without adverting to the material on the basis of which the said report is filed. Karnataka High Court.
Bail in NDPS cases. Though mere delay in obtaining Forensic Science Lab report is not a ground to grant bail-Prosecution shall secure the report at the earliest to prevent detention of accused for an indefinite period. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Trial. Expert handwriting opinion can be relied only when it is supported by internal and external evidence. Law on the point discussed. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention under the Goonda Act. Failure to furnish translated copies of the documents to the detenue renders the detention unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Contributory negligence cannot be attributed to victim riding vehicle simply because he did not have driving license and insurance, especially when he was riding on the correct side of the road. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act,1988. Tribunal or Court should not apply the split multiplier in routine course and multiplier should be applied. An injured or the legal representatives of the deceased should not be deprived from getting a just compensation. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Tribble riding on a two-wheeler itself is not a ground to avoid insurance liability unless it is established that the tribble riding was the cause for the accident to attribute contributory negligence. Karnataka High Court.
Where the materials on record prima facie disclose specific, detailed, and consistent allegations of sexual assault and other offenses like physical assault and criminal intimidation, supported by a pattern of coercion, digital blackmail, and threats, the defense of a ‘consensual relationship’ or disputes over facts must be determined during a full trial, and not at the preliminary stage of quashing. Karnataka High Court.
In cases involving cyber economic crimes and corporate espionage, courts must exercise caution in granting anticipatory bail, especially when national security interests are implicated. The risk of evidence tampering and destruction justifies the denial of anticipatory bail. Karnataka High Court.
Initiation of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act do not bar initiation of proceedings for the offense of cheating. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules. The one-year limit for compassionate appointments should not be strictly applied if authorities fail to act on a timely, although informal, application from an illiterate widow, as their inaction deprives eligible dependents of a fair chance to apply. Karnataka High Court.
A plaint cannot be rejected merely because the plaintiff disputes her signature on the vakalat, as this is not a ground under Order 7 Rule 11. Such a procedural defect should be allowed to be cured and cannot defeat the party’s substantive rights. Karnataka High Court.
Civil Procedure Code. Rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 constitutes a decree under Section 2 (2) and is appealable under Section 96. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. A daughter’s right to a share in ancestral coparcenary property is a birthright that remains unaffected by revenue-based mutation entries and sale based on such entries. Any denial of a coparcenary share based on the presence or absence of revenue entries is legally unsustainable, as title must be adjudicated based on the source of acquisition and the nature of the property rather than administrative record-keeping. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act and Section 376 of the IPC. Enemity between the families of the accused and the victim coupled with negative DNA report are factors to be taken note of. Where the victim’s testimony is inconsistent, the medical evidence is inconclusive, and there is an unexplained, inordinate delay in filing the FIR, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Karnataka High Court.
Kartha of a Hindu Joint Family possesses the legal authority to alienate ancestral property without the consent of other coparceners, provided the alienation is for ‘legal necessity’ or for the ‘benefit of the estate’—such as meeting the expenses for a daughter’s marriage or family maintenance. Once such necessity is proved, the sale is binding on all members of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.
A second wife, during the subsistence of her husband’s first marriage, is not a legal heir of her deceased husband. She is not entitled to a share in his property, and her right is limited only to maintenance. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty celebrates his 59th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Savanur Vishwajith Shetty: Born on 19.05.1967. Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 28.04.2020 and Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Important Judgements delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice S Vishwajith Shetty.
Karnataka Police Act. Mere apprehension of the police is not enough to pass an order of externment. There must be grounds and adequate materials to show that there is danger based upon credible materials. Karnataka High Court.
Wife demanding separate residence does not always amount to cruelty for grant of divorce. There must be determination to put an end to marital relation and cohabitation. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Excise Act. Compliance of Sections 53 and 54 i.e. securing search warrant or to record the grounds to dispense with the search warrant is mandatory. Non-compliance of the same would vitiate the conviction order. Karnataka High Court.
Judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case can be challenged before the High Court under Section 378(4) Cr.PC and an appeal under Section 378(2) Cr.PC before the Sessions Court is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Rash and negligent driving resulting in death. Leniency can be shown on the sentence that is imposed on the accused in the event if the family members of the deceased receive the compensation from the accused. Karnataka High Court.
When Juvenile Justice Board decides to try the juvenile as an adult, the accused can, apart from appealing against the order, seek bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Karnataka High Court.
Arms Act. When the gun seized from the accused was unloaded and no ammunition was found in possession of the accused, the gun cannot be said to have been used for hunting purposes. Karnataka High Court sets aside conviction.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Application for restoration filed 25 years after the sale cannot be entertained by the authorities since it is beyond reasonable time. Karnataka High Court.
Judicial estoppel. Person participating in the proceedings despite knowledge of the defect in the jurisdiction of an Authority without any objection is disentitled from questioning the jurisdiction in subsequent proceeding. Karnataka High Court.
“Child cannot be allowed to remain in unhealthy atmosphere”. Karnataka High Court orders custody of the minor child to the father having found the wife to be in immoral relationship.
Order XXIII Rule 1(3)(b) of CPC applies even to writ proceedings. Withdrawal of writ petition with liberty to file fresh petition on the same cause of action does not act as resjudicata. Karnataka High Court.
Order XVIII Rule 3 of CPC. Rebuttal evidence is permissible only in respect of issues casting onus on the other side and the said opportunity cannot be utilized to fill up the lacuna in the evidence of the party leading evidence first. Karnataka High Court.
Writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked challenging issuance of caste certificate since alternate remedy of appeal is provided under the Karnataka SC/ST & OBC (Reservation of Appointments, etc.,) Act. Karnataka High Court.
“State has no power to direct reservation in employment in favour of SC, ST and OBCs in Private Schools under the Karnataka Education Act.” Landmark Judgement from the Karnataka High Court.
Withdrawal of exemption under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act on the ground of financial loss of an establishment for three consecutive years is not unconstitutional. Karnataka High Court.
When urgency clause in invoked under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the State must act with quite promptitude failing which the acquisition proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
Writ Court cannot direct the Government to frame scheme under Article 162 of the Constitution especially when the parties have alternative remedy for the redressal of their grievances. Karnataka High Court.
When correction of arbitration award is sought, limitation to challenge award commences from the date on which request for correction of award has been disposed of by arbitrator and not from the date of the original award. Karnataka High Court.
”Every order or transaction pursuant to fraudulent act is void ab initio and the same cannot be allowed to stand”. Karnataka High Court, while ordering restoration of khata which was fraudulently changed.
Change of entries in property register by playing fraud. Such fraudulent entry can be set aside in a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Nominated members have no right to cast their votes in the election to President and Vice President under the Karnataka Municipalities Act. Karnataka High Court.
Tahsildar has jurisdiction under Section 140(2) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act to carry out survey work and fix boundaries even in respect lands falling within the limits of Corporation. Karnataka High Court.
Transport vehicle and omnibus, when gross weight does not exceed 7500 kg would be a light motor vehicle. Holder of LMV driving licence is competent to drive such transport vehicle only when the weight does not exceed the limit. Karnataka High Court.
Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. Time limit of 90 days for passing the order in original under Regulation 17 is directory and not mandatory. Karnataka High Court.
Family pension. Order of priority under the pension Rules prevail over order of priority under the Hindu Succession Act. When wife is alive, no other legal/illegitimate heir can claim family pension. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. Application for resumption and restoration of granted land filed 10 years after the sale can be rejected on the ground of delay and laches. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. Delay of 16 years from the date of sale in filing application for resumption and restoration of granted land. Karnataka High Court quashes the entire proceedings.
Service Law. Minimum qualifications for appointments prescribed under the UGC guidelines are for the purpose of maintaining excellence in the higher standards of education. Universities have no power to relax them. Karnataka High Court.
‘Corruption hurts everyone. Corruption erodes trust of a common man in the system. Anti corruption law shall be invoked against persons, who by virtue of their office are discharging public duty’. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Employee of Society, registered under the Societies Registration Act, which receives funds from Government, is a ‘public servant’ and liable for prosecution under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Default bail under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. Order extending time to complete investigation without notifying or producing the accused is bad in law. Accused are entitled to default bail in such eventuality. Karnataka High Court.
Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Industry having outdoor catering services for factory canteen cannot claim Cenvit credit post 2011. Court, while dealing with taxing statute, cannot include what is specifically excluded. Karnataka High Court.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Order XXIX Rule 1. Director of company can NOT institute a suit without board resolution or ratification. Temporary injunction can be refused on the ground of maintainability of the suit. Karnataka High Court.
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 does not apply to acquisitions under the Bangalore Development Authority Act. Karnataka High Court reiterates.
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976. Section 38-B. Karnataka High Court declares bulk allotment of acquired land by BDA in favour of BDA Employees’ Welfare Association as illegal. Dismisses PIL for non-joinder of allottes of the sites.
Environment. Declaring forest as non-forest under the Karnataka Forest Act without the prior approval of the Central Government is illegal. Take action against erring officials – Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Power under Section 311 to summon material witness or examine person present can be invoked by the court suo motu and even at a stage when the case is posted for judgment. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Non-recording or delayed recording or improper recording of statement under Section 161-3 is a serious irregularity which is incurable. Conviction under NDPS Act set aside on this ground. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Section 319. Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence cannot be exercised in a casual manner on the basis of a stray statement of the complainant. Karnataka High Court.
Aarogya Setu App. Informed consent of users of the app is must for sharing user data by the Government of India and National Informatics Centre. Karnataka High Court.
Properties purchased by husband in the name of his wife are the absolute properties of the wife in view of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
Daughters born prior to coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 are also entitled for coparcenary property under the amended Section 6. Karnataka High Court.
Special statutes prevail over the Limitation Act. Appellate Authority has no power to entertain an appeal beyond the period of one month as stipulated under Section 107(4) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Karnataka High Court.
Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. In a case of surrender of land by tenant, procedure of taking possession under Section 29 of the Act does not apply. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Trustee is the owner and custodian of Trust property and cannot claim occupancy rights under Section 45 of the Act in respect of the Trust property. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Any action taken by the authorities under the Act beyond a reasonable period cannot be sustained. Karnataka High Court quashes resumption order.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Sub-tenants are entitled to be registered as occupants of the land, only when the sub-tenancy was created prior to 2 October 1965. Karnataka High Court.
High Court under Article 226 cannot interfere with the order of the fact-finding authority like the Land Tribunal especially when the order is based on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to reject the application for conversion of land after the expiry of four months when the deeming clause under Section 95 (5) applies. Karnataka High Court.
Blocking Input Tax Credit available in Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Post-decisional or remedial hearing shall be granted to the person/assessee affected. Karnataka High Court.
Tenancy rights can be adjudicated only before the Land Tribunal. Tahsildar has no right to enter the name of the Government in RTC assuming vesting of the land. Karnataka High Court.
”It is the duty of the Court and the Prosecution to protect the right of informant/victim to oppose bail application of the accused for the rape offence under IPC or under POCSO Act.” Karnataka High Court issues exhaustive guidelines.
Bail application of an accused for the offences punishable under Section 376(3), 376-AB, 376DA or 376-DB of IPC or under POCSO Act cannot be heard without giving opportunity of being heard to the informant/victim. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act being later prevails over the SC/ST Atrocities Act. Where accused is charged with both SC/ST Atrocities Act and POCSO Act, petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C can be filed before High Court. Karnataka High Court.
There is no need for the Court order appointing guardian in respect of minor’s undivided interest in joint family. Parents can sell undivided interest of minor in joint family property. Karnataka High Court.
Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act. Re-grant in favour of the Watandar/Inamadar would enure to the benefit of the purchaser if the sale was made prior to the last date of filing an application for re-grant. Karnataka High Court.
Prosecution has no right to apply for modification of the chargesheet under Section 216 and 217 of the Cr.P.C. Only the trial Court can suo motu exercise power to alter the chargesheet. Karnataka High Court.
When a document which is required to be stamped is not sufficiently stamped, even the copy of such document is not admissible as secondary evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Recovery of Government dues. ‘’The practice of bringing the entire extent of land for sale for recovery of dues which would be otherwise recovered by selling a portion of the property is highly deplorable’’. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Control of Organised Crime Act. Service of grounds of arrest on the accused immediately after his arrest would be sufficient compliance under Section 50(1) of Cr.PC and Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Willful failure to submit income tax returns. There is a presumption of a culpable mental state on the part of the accused. The accused has to rebut this presumption in accordance with the law. Karnataka High Court.
Retailers or showroom owners cannot be prosecuted under the Insecticides Act, 1968, for selling a substandard product unless it is proven that they had knowledge of its defective nature or were responsible for its manufacture or quality control. Criminal liability under the Act requires mens rea, and prosecution should be limited to persons directly responsible for the product’s quality and distribution. Karnataka High Court.
Magistrate’s Court has no jurisdiction to try offences under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, as per Section 32(2) of the Act. Such cases must be committed to the Sessions Court, and failure to do so renders the entire trial and conviction void. Karnataka High Court.
The right to default bail is a fundamental right when the charge sheet is not filed within the prescribed period. Courts must ensure judicial scrutiny before permitting mechanical addition of stringent charges. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 494 IPC are liable to be quashed if filed beyond the limitation period under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Mere allegations without concrete proof of a second marriage or direct involvement of accused relatives amount to an abuse of process, warranting relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
In matrimonial disputes, criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC cannot be sustained based on vague, omnibus allegations, particularly against aged in-laws living separately. Unexplained delay in filing an FIR casts doubt on the credibility of allegations. Karnataka High Court.
Partition Act, 1893. Where a property is found to be indivisible and if multiple shareholders seek to exercise their right to buy out other shares, the Court must facilitate a competitive process and is legally mandated to sell the shares to the shareholder who offers the highest price above the court’s valuation. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. In a suit for declaration and possession involving agricultural land, the market value for the purpose of calculating Court fees must be determined solely as 25 times the annual land revenue as prescribed by the deeming provision in Section 7(2) of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. If possession was already held by the purchaser prior to the agreement of sale or if possession is not delivered under the agreement, the document is only liable to be stamped under the lower duty. Karnataka High Court.
When a jurisdictional issue is raised belatedly, after substantial evidence has already been led on the original issues, the Trial Court cannot exercise discretion to treat it as a preliminary issue. In such circumstances, the mandate under Order XIV Rule 2(1) to decide all issues together must prevail. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. A person who claims a right to the testator’s property adverse to the testator’s title and who is not an heir under succession or inheritance, does not have a ‘caveatable interest’ and cannot be impleaded as an objector in a petition for the grant of probate. Karnataka High Court.
Order XVIII Rule 1 and 3 CPC. Trial Court has no power to compel a defendant to lead evidence first, especially on issues where the burden of proof lies on the plaintiffs. The plaintiff must first lead evidence on all issues where the burden of proof rests on him. Karnataka High Court.
An accused already in custody for one offense requires formal arrest and remand in the second offense for their custody in the latter case to be legal. In such an eventuality, fresh bail application can be filed before the Trial Court, even if previously granted bail and released in the initial offense. Karnataka High Court.
The right to default bail is a fundamental right when the charge sheet is not filed within the prescribed period. Courts must ensure judicial scrutiny before permitting mechanical addition of stringent charges. Karnataka High Court.
SARFAESI Act. When a security interest is duly registered, it creates a first charge that overrides any subsequent attachment order issued by tax authorities under State legislations like the KVAT Act. The ‘prior in time’ interest of a secured creditor must be honored, and the State cannot claim a superior charge over assets that have already been legally sold to satisfy a registered security interest. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Enforcement of a foreign award can be refused only on specific statutory grounds. ‘Patent illegality’ ground is not available in respect of foreign awards. A party who voluntarily chooses not to participate in arbitration despite due notice cannot later claim they were ‘unable to present their case’ to resist enforcement. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. A subsequent agreement holder or purchaser is not a necessary or proper party to be impleaded in the suit since such transactions are governed by the principle of lis pendens. Karnataka High Court.
Payment of Gratuity Act is a special, self-contained code. The Appellate Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal or condone delay once a total period of 120 days from the date of receipt of the order has expired, and it has no power to extend this period further. Karnataka High Court.
Commercial Courts Act: An order passed by a Commercial Court rejecting a plaint amounts to a “decree” under Section 2(2) of the CPC. The aggrieved party must prefer a commercial appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Act. A writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is not maintainable when such an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy of appeal exists. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A party who disputes the very existence or execution of the agreement cannot maintain an application for referral to arbitration under Section 8, as the existence of a valid and admitted agreement is the jurisdictional bedrock for such an order. A Trial Court exceeds its jurisdiction if it refers parties to arbitration when the underlying agreement is denied by the applicant themselves. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. When a plaintiff seeks a declaration that a document is void, without claiming the consequential reliefs of possession or injunction related to that declaration, the court fee is to be computed on the value assigned by the plaintiff in the plaint, and not on the market value of the property. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXXVII CPC. In summary suits, ten days period prescribed under Rule 3(5) for the defendant to apply for leave to defend, counted from the date of service of the summons for judgment is merely the outer limit. An application for leave to defend filed by the defendant after entering appearance but before the service of the summons for judgment is not premature and is legally maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
The Executing Court should permit an amendment to the execution petition and its schedule when the decreed property has undergone physical changes after the decree. Refusing such an amendment solely on the ground that the Court cannot travel beyond the decree amounts to ignoring relevant subsequent events and would unjustly deprive the decree-holder of the fruits of the decree on a mere technicality. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXIII Rule 3A. When an application questioning the compromise raises a substantial legal question concerning a purported attempt to deprive a daughter of her statutory right to an equal share in coparcenary property, the trial court cannot summarily dismiss the application without issuing notice to the parties or considering its merits. Karnataka High Court.
Stamp Act. Court has the statutory power to impound any document that is insufficiently stamped at any stage of the proceedings even after the disposal of the suit and to direct the payment of deficit stamp duty and penalty. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. Refundable security deposit stipulated in a lease deed does not constitute ‘money advanced in addition to the rent reserved’. Stamp duty on the lease deed must be calculated solely on the basis of the rent reserved, excluding the refundable security deposit. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Joint family property inadvertently omitted from the plaint and the consequent preliminary decree can be included during the final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Drugs and Cosmetics Act. An Inspector appointed under Section 21(1) retains competency upon being transferred to a new area without requiring a fresh Gazette Notification. The bar on trial by a Court inferior to the Court of Session under Section 32(2) does not preclude a Magistrate from taking cognizance of the complaint and committing the case to the Sessions Court for trial. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. There must be a direct and proximate link between the accused’s actions and the deceased’s death. A clear mens rea (guilty mind) and an active, direct act intended to push the person to commit suicide are required. General allegations of torture in a death note, or words uttered in the heat of a moment, are not sufficient to prove abetment.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Female relatives of the husband/male partner can be included as ‘respondents’. However, the quantum of interim maintenance is determined by the proven income of the respondent, and courts are justified in reducing it if the applicant fails to provide evidence of higher income. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice R Devdas celebrates his 57th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice R Devdas: Born on 15th May 1969. Studied in Sri Ramakrishna Vidyashala, Mysore. Pre-University Education and Bachelor of Arts at St.Joseph’s Arts and Science College, Bangalore and Bachelor of Law at Sri Jagadguru Renukacharya College of Law, Bangalore.
Started practice in the year 1994 in the office of M/s. Jayaram & Jayaram, Advocates, Bangalore.
Appointed as Addl. Government Advocate for State of Karnataka on 6th June 2008.
Appointed as Principal Government Advocate on 10th July 2014.
Appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14th February 2018.
Appointed as Permanent Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 7th January 2020.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Devdas
Service Law. Person who questions a Government order in Court and accepts another Government order without demure loses right to challenge the first order. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. Section 147. Mere change of opinion on consideration of the same material is not a ground to reopen the assessment. Full Bench Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC-ST PTCL Act. Application for resumption of land after sale with prior permission NOT maintainable. Alternative appeal remedy not a bar for Writ Petition against illegal order of Assistant Commissioner. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Separated son has NO right in ancestral property left by kartha. He can claim share as Class-I heir after death of Kartha in notional partition. Karnataka High Court.
Unlike access to justice, forum convenience is not a fundamental right. Only the Chief Justice of High Court has power to allocate work to puisne judges of respective benches of High Court. Karnataka High Court clarifies.
Air India Limited is not a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India after disinvestment and hence Writ against it is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka High Court condones the delay of 20 years in seeking resumption of granted and later tenanted lands under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978.
When sole plaintiff dies and application is filed by persons claiming to be legal representatives, it is the duty of the Court to consider whether the right to sue survives. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BTnGA03wYX2oD6qRmngdeBORw Plaint in a suit for a primary relief of partition and separate possession cannot be rejected on the ground of limitation though the secondary prayer is barred by time especially when both the prayers are interconnected. Karnataka High Court.
Occupancy rights cannot be claimed or granted under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in respect of garden land (bagayat land). Karnataka High Court reiterates.
Conversion of granted land for non-agricultural purposes and construction of residential building in industrial zone cannot be a ground to cancel the grant. Karnataka High Court.
Purchasers of inam lands after vesting of the lands in the State cannot claim occupancy rights under Section 9 of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1958. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC-ST PTCL Act. Conversion of land for non-agricultural purposes will operate as prior permission to sell only if the land is converted by the original grantee and not by the purchaser. Karnataka High Court.
Creation/claim of tenancy under the KLR Act in respect of granted lands also amounts to ‘transfer’ under the SC/ST (PTCL) Act, 1978 and hence the same is void though the Tribunal order has become final. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC-ST PTCL Act, 1978. Application for prior permission to alienate granted land filed by power of attorney of the grantee can NOT be considered. Only grantee or his legal heirs can apply for prior permission. Karnataka High Court.
“Purpose of acquisition is relevant factor in determining the compensation’’. Karnataka High Court enhances compensation from Rs. 750/- to Rs. 2000/- for the land acquired for Court complex.
Service law. In the absence of clear proof based on the evidence of witnesses in the enquiry, an adverse presumption cannot be drawn on the guilt of the accused. Karnataka High Court sets aside compulsory retirement on corruption charges.
Standalone distilleries established for manufacturing ethanol are not governed by the provisions of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966. Karnataka High Court.
Planning Authority cannot seek relinquishment of Buffer Zone or the building line where construction cannot take place, free of cost, to the Planning Authority while sanctioning the development plan. Karnataka High Court.
Reference Court while awarding compensation in respect of the sub-soil/minerals underneath the soil of the acquired properties shall take into consideration the provisions of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules. Karnataka High Court.
Freedom fighters’ pension. The proof required must be as provided in the pension scheme itself. As long as such proof was not available, the benefit cannot be granted. Karnataka High Court, while following the Supreme Court Judgment.
Appointment of arbitrator. Question of limitation can be gone into only in the very limited category of cases where there is not even a vestige of doubt that the claim is ex facie time barred. Karnataka High Court.
Grant of lands under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. There is no restriction that the land shall not be granted to more than one member of the same family. Karnataka High Court.
Inamdar or his successors have no right to alienate lands already vested under the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954. Subsequent purchasers cannot seek grant of occupancy rights. Karnataka High Court.
Writ Court can give directions to compel the performance in a proper and lawful manner and itself can pass orders which the Government or the public authority should have passed had it properly and lawfully exercised its discretion. Karnataka High Court.
Second Writ Petition for mandamus is maintainable when the earlier direction was not complied. Writ Court can give directions to compel the performance in a proper and lawful manner. Karnataka High Court.
Conducting land survey and marking boundaries under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act cannot be resorted to claim title over the property instead of approaching the civil Court. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. There is no restriction for grant of land to more than one member of the same family under Section 94-A. Karnataka High Court.
Tahsildar cannot order removal of name from the land records unilaterally asserting the land to be government land and without following the procedure under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Karnataka High Court.
Assistant Commissioner has no power to initiate suo motu proceedings under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act in respect of the entries made in the land records. Karnataka High Court.
Land grants obtained allegedly by playing fraud can be cancelled only by initiating appropriate proceedings within reasonable time. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Gift of granted land by grantee in favour of his/her son/daughter without prior permission also attracts the provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Violation of Sections 79A & 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act cannot be alleged in respect of sale of agricultural properties which took place prior to 1 March 1974. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Plea of Adverse possession by the purchaser of granted land can be taken only if there is uninterrupted and continuous possession without animus to constitute hostile rights and possession. Karnataka High Court.
The advantage of omission of Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act is available even to pending review petition before the Appellate Tribunal. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Period of non-alienation for tenanted lands commences from the final order of the Land Tribunal and not from the date of issuance of Form-10. Karnataka High Court.
When tenancy is governed under the Karnataka Rent Act, Civil Court has no jurisdiction to pass a decree for possession of the tenanted property. Karnataka High Court.
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act. Even after exemption granted under the Act, Deputy Commissioner has the authority to proceed if owners of land violate the order of exemption passed by the State Government. Karnataka High Court.
Undervaluation of transaction. Deputy Commissioner must, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, shall hold an enquiry to assess proper market value before levying the duty. Karnataka High Court.
Application for amendment of pleadings after commencement of trial can be permitted only if the applicant demonstrates that, notwithstanding the exercise of due diligence, the application could not have been filed at an earlier stage. Karnataka High Court.
Election to cooperative society. If rejection of nomination paper is per se illegal, Writ Court can entertain the petition under Article 226 without relegating the parties to the election petition. Karnataka High Court.
Where a person is a party to the document and seeks relief regarding the said document, he must pay court fee on the value of the subject-matter. Clever drafting cannot be used to avoid court fee. Karnataka High Court.
A person who has taken advantage or benefit of a provision of law, can not be permitted to raise a challenge to the very same provision under which the benefit was taken. Karnataka High Court.
Planning Authority has no power to impose penalty for delayed development of the layout project, beyond the time granted for completion of the project, in the absence of legislative sanction. Karnataka High Court.
Constitution of India. In the absence of legislative sanction, the State Government, in exercise of its executive powers under Article 162, cannot levy and collect penalty, merely by issuing a notification. Karnataka High Court.
Family Courts Act. Suit for declaration regarding marital status between two ladies claiming to be the legally wedded wife of a certain person falls within the jurisdiction of the family court and not the civil court. Karnataka High Court.
Usage of a portion of residential building for non-residential activities cannot be a reason to cancel allotment of house site especially when the site falls within municipal corporation area. Karnataka High Court.
When the scheme formulated under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act to form residential layout is lapsed, the Authority cannot refuse sanction of residential layout plan submitted by the landowners. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act. Though regrant of land enures to the benefit of the purchaser, notice to the original grantee is mandatory before regularising the alienation. Karnataka High Court.
Rejection of Plaint. Adjudication of the plea of resjudicata requires consideration of the pleadings, issues and decisions in the previous suit. Plaint cannot be rejected under such circumstances. Karnataka High Court.
A compromise decree in an ejectment suit, where the tenant agrees to vacate upon breach of conditions, is directly executable without requiring a fresh suit. Once a compromise is recorded by the court, it becomes enforceable as a decree. Karnataka High Court.
Acquisition by BDA. When adjacent lands are not acquired or deleted from the acquisition, small islands of acquired land cannot be used as a standalone park or playground in regard to a layout formed in a different unconnected lands. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Gift deed involving a senior citizen cannot be cancelled unless it contains a specific covenant that the transferee will provide basic amenities and basic physical needs to the donor. Karnataka High Court.
Planning authority cannot reject an application for a development plan on the sole premise of a mere proposal for future development or acquisition, unless a formal notification for acquisition has been issued. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. A suit for partition by a deceased Hindu male’s sister’s daughters is liable for rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC, as, in the absence of Class I heirs, the deceased’s brothers inherit the property to the exclusion of the sister’s daughters. Karnataka High Court.
Cause of action would mean and include the very right to sue. If the plaint does not disclose the right to sue, it must be rejected in order to weed out unnecessary, frivolous litigation, and save precious judicial time for deserving cases. Karnataka High Court.
A daughter-in-law cannot be compelled to pay maintenance to her mother-in-law under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Proceedings under Sections 79A and 79B cannot be initiated in respect of the transactions occurred prior to the enactment of the sections. Karnataka High Court.
A plaint can be rejected at the threshold if, upon a meaningful reading, it is clear that the suit is barred by limitation, even when the question of limitation is generally considered a mixed question of law and fact. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Tahsildar cannot refuse to enter the purchaser’s name in the revenue records on the ground that the sale violates the Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Unless and until the competent authority declares the sale void and sets it aside, the Tahsildar has no authority to deny such mutation. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules. State cannot pass an order regarding payment for standing trees on granted land without first obtaining a formal valuation from the competent authority. Any administrative order issued without such a technical valuation report is procedurally flawed and liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Deputy Commissioner cannot reject an application for conversion of land on the ground that the land transaction violates the Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Though the Deputy Commissioner can initiate ‘suo-motu’ proceedings through the Assistant Commissioner to investigate PTCL violations, he must consider the conversion application independently. Karnataka High Court.
Rejection of plaint. A suit for partition, filed several years after the original transaction solely to harass a subsequent purchaser, amounts to bogus litigation and must be nipped in the bud, even if clever drafting creates an illusion of cause of action to overcome the law of limitation. Karnataka High Court.
Res Judicata. A subsequent suit for partition and separate possession is barred if a previous suit seeking the identical relief between the same parties or their predecessors-in-interest has already been dismissed by a competent Court. The fact that the earlier suit was dismissed without recording evidence or a detailed adjudication on merits does not prevent the bar of res judicata from operating. Karnataka High Court.
Authorities under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and the Karnataka Sakala Services Act must process mutation and revenue entry applications within the prescribed timelines. Unexplained delay in updating records based on a registered sale deed amounts to a breach of public duty. Karnataka High Court imposes personal costs on the erring official.
Civil Procedure Code. Section 24. A transfer application falls within the ambit of ‘other proceedings,’ and an order passed on such an application constitutes a ‘case decided,’ as it finally disposes of the matter before the District Judge. Consequently, a Civil Revision Petition is maintainable against such an order. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Mere proposal for acquisition of land by Government cannot be a ground to reject conversion of the land. Karnataka High Court.
Irrevocable General Power of Attorney along with an Agreement of Sale and affidavit executed by the lease-cum-sale allottee prior to the judgment in Suraj Lamps can be relied on for the purpose of executing sale deed by the Development Authority in favour of the GPA holder. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition proceedings are liable to be quashed when the acquired land remains an undeveloped ‘island’ surrounded by private developments, making the formation of a self-contained layout impossible, and such challenges are not barred by prior dismissals or delay, as the non-implementation of the scheme provides a fresh cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal authority cannot adjudicate on the validity of registered gift deeds or civil court judgments while considering a khata transfer application. If there are existing khatas registered in other individuals’ names, those parties must be given an opportunity to be heard before any orders affecting their rights are passed. Karnataka High Court.
A plaint is liable to be rejected if the suit seeks to re-adjudicate issues that have already been conclusively decided in prior litigation between the same parties or their privies. A probate, when granted by a competent court, is conclusive as to the validity and due execution of the Will, and a subsequent suit challenging the same on grounds already litigated is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
The buffer zone requirement under the Revised Master Plan 2015 does not apply to layouts approved before its finalisation. Where a layout was sanctioned prior to RMP-2015, authorities cannot refuse a building plan solely on the ground of buffer zone compliance. Karnataka High Court.
Under the amended Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, revenue authorities are bound to entertain applications seeking cancellation of land forfeiture, even when the forfeiture is followed by sale of the property for recovery of government dues. Upon repayment of the arrears, the authorities must delete ‘Sarkari Pada’ entry from the revenue records. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Deputy Commissioner’s authority under Section 136 (3) is limited to correcting revenue entries and does not extend to annulling previous land grants, determining the validity of transactions, or ordering the resumption of land. The suo motu power cannot be exercised decades after the original grant, especially when third-party interests have been established. Karnataka High Court.
The eligibility of land for regularization of unauthorized occupation, in relation to the prescribed prohibited distance from a local authority’s boundary, must be determined with reference to the geographical boundary and legal status as they existed on the date of filing the original application, and not as on the date of its consideration. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules Grantee of land must be afforded an opportunity to pay the assessed value of the standing trees within the time prescribed by the granting authority. Any cancellation of the grant without adhering to this procedure is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. A revenue grant of land in a manner known to law cannot be unilaterally nullified or deleted from the Record of Rights by the Tahsildar on the mere claim that the land is a ‘Sarkari Gunduthopu,’ as ‘gunduthopu’ land is not statutorily prohibited from being granted. Karnataka High Court.
Section 148 CPC. Civil Court’s power to extend time for payment of deficit court fee is limited to a maximum of thirty days. If the plaintiff fails to pay within this period, the suit remains still-born and cannot be registered. Acceptance of deficit court fee after undue delay, without a timely extension application, is without jurisdiction and defeats the mandatory intent of the Court Fees Act. Karnataka High Court.
A land owner’s right to seek conversion of land from agricultural to non-agricultural use cannot be denied by the Deputy Commissioner solely on the ground that there is a proposal or a preliminary notification for future land acquisition by the State. Until the land is formally vested in the State through a final award and possession, the owner retains the right to put the land to better use, and authorities are obligated to process conversion application. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. When the lands stand in the name of a private individual as the kathedar, the Deputy Commissioner cannot record the same as ‘unrecorded habitations’ under Section 38A. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules. The gainful employment of the applicant’s family members is not a disqualification for the grant of land. Cancellation of the grant after a prolonged lapse of time is illegal. Karnataka High Court.
The Revenue authorities cannot initiate proceedings to cancel land grants or delete entries from the Record of Rights after an inordinate and unexplained delay. Failure of the State to maintain its own records cannot be used as a ground to penalize bona fide holders of the land. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Agreement of sale, without any condition that the transaction would be proceeded after obtaining prior permission from the Government, amounts to ‘transfer’ and hence void. Consequently, suit for specific performance of such an agreement is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupiers) Act. When a dispute of title is raised against a show-cause notice issued under the Act, the Estate Officer does not have the jurisdiction to decide such disputed questions of title; such disputes can only be adjudicated by a competent Civil Court. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. In proceedings for the regularization of unauthorized cultivation of government land under Chapter XIII-A, an application cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the remaining land would be insufficient for free pasturage since the statutory proviso to the Rules explicitly exempts regularization cases from the requirement of maintaining a minimum pasturage limit and from the necessity of obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner for such reduction. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Rules. Tahsildar has no jurisdiction to reject an application for regularization of unauthorized occupation of government land without placing such applications before the ‘Committee for Regularisation of Unauthorised Occupation’ for its consideration. Karnataka High Court.
Daksha Legal 