Gift is between Donor and Donee. When donor who challenged gift deed withdraws the suit, his children cannot question the gift deed on the ground of fraud etc. Karnataka High Court.
To Know more click the link below:
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2q91g3Nc709suMufdZKeoYM5x
On 1st June 2024, I was a guest in a Bar Association function at Mysore along with Justice Srinivas Harish Kumar Both we met Dr SL Bhyrappa and spent some valuable time. Justice Srinivas Harish Kumar rushed back to Bangalore in urgency, me staying back.
On the next morning I spent very profitable time with Prof Ajjappa.. Even at 95, he jubilantly discussed about the works of O.W.Holmes (Common Law), Cardozo (Growth of the Law), Aharon Barak of Israel (Judge in a Democracy), Michael Kirby of Australia (On HM Seervai)& Hans Kelson (Pure Theory of Law). Oh, what a brilliant mind indeed !!!.. How time slipped away, astonishes me..
I was an ardent student of Prof Ajjappa in ULC at Dharwad during 1986-1989. In fact it’s he who secured admission for me after blasting VC of KUD for a defective Notification..
Those days, ULC was known as ‘Ajjappa’s College’. He had maintained a huge & well organised Law Library which even Prof Upendra Baxi had praised.. He was a tall personality and a very strict disciplinarian.. He had earned a great reputation for the college..He was ready even to lay down his life for it..
He used to bring great stalwarts like Jethmalani, Tarkunde, Rajiv Dharan, etc to impress young minds. He had brought lawyers of repute like Sri IG Hiregoudar, etc to teach law. He took classes when regular teachers were away..
During UGC Pay Scale strike, he placed students to take classes, and I was one of them.. He had immense admiration for hardworking students and staff.. He used to praise Kotre, who dedicated his life to Library..
Ajjappa was straight forward and a bit short tempered too.. He had slapped a Senator and matter had landed in court.. He was in the forefront in collecting public contributions for the bereaved family of Prof Seshadri who was brutally murdered in 1988 or so..
He had personally paid the hostel/mess fees of some poor students without seeing caste, creed, etc.. When he retired, many shed tears and I was a witness to that..
Post retirement Ajjappa was practising in K-HK and his advocacy was far from satisfactory.. He shortly quit the Bar murmuring ‘It’s better to graze sheep on the hill side than to be in court..’ Perhaps he was quoting Jeremy Bentham..
He served as Principal in SJR Law College; he had appointed me as a part timer though i lacked LLM. He taught in NLSUI Bangalore.. I am told, he too had played a role in founding it..He was also in Raipur & Calcutta.
Ajjappa has authored a few books and contributed many articles to the reputed journals.. His treatise on research methodology makes a good read.. To many his classes were not that impressive.. To a few like me, they were.. Discussions with him however were a treat, to say the least..
Dharwad was fascinating to him.. He remembered every teacher and student.. During visit, we used to see glee in his face.. He loved Mysore too and spent the evening of his life there with the sacred spouse.. Occasionally he would call me over phone and take class on jurisprudence.. At times he would criticise our judgements.. His memory was superb and narration of facts was simply thrilling..He had deep knowledge of Roman law and history.. He had a fair exposure to Indian & western philosophies.. He was absolutely unhappy with courts’ delays..
Often he took names of M. Hiriyanna, Dr Radhakrishnan Immanuel Kant, Schopenhauer, etc.. In the past few years he was a bit unattached to the mundane things.. He donated all his valuable books to institutions as Cardozo gifted all his property to Columbia University..
Our beloved Professor Ajjappa whom I saw only yesterday, has breathed his last, today. An Era has ended creating a big void.. ‘Old order changeth, yielding place to the new…’
When Mahatma Gandhi died, Sarojini Naidu wrote ‘Let his soul not rest in peace’ far the nation needed him.. Can we pay homage to the departed MASTER in the same words ?
– Krishna S. Dixit
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai K celebrates his 50th 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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZvfpiM9jgk6KmdCNTV9Sogygi
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3yO5iXe0D8fYpw3meBwPR68uZ
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qhP62q66ATPHhdLMUcCTX8cxa
Detention order cannot be challenged by seeking a writ of habeas corpus when the order is already confirmed by the Government. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MnxaiWk0qwtrd7588kKIvraEd
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7UTihjbQp9moOF1q7nhDYkqB1
Standalone distilleries established for manufacturing ethanol are not governed by the provisions of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/38cSBtPNZ8e30EypvazeF1kaG
”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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kIhc3BZ7KVRHEMy33ZERotrxo
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/msvpAAACoAfhGd53sXrnirOYr
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qosie13nmYln8Tx9PKcErf0xo
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6hF6iROyju8TkYh7k5DLfVSAY
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pQ4LAEHqp44ZJxjFgvFQO2USf
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2kZLXZsmtqwqqVeJ0eNGBgnaO
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/9wWx3qfq6ccbcDdbHYBTCulVJ
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/E1wfv4VGa0TNsLHRVavLwnGmv
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wy3wl6nZw7LFOxlg7RBhBtPaA
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/zH834ahrX6uH119xcWZfZPNRI
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/b10mcMM9yxepJDXmLzrfw5SNp
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/D6g80YgX9nWSZCkF8cSdIm4iT
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pJvQkJitCHqzCvwPtaXmOQYzs
Cheque issued by vendor to purchaser of property as security towards pending litigation on the property is not ‘legally enforceable debt’. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Na19wjtHeYeDIZflY4Cl9AZoI
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/U8gDvQNhM5qyiRGF2Ky2mOvX4
Preventive detention under the Goonda Act. Failure to furnish translated copies of the documents to the detenue renders the detention unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/SqYR1pzRQxlJKtLyXJ5FfBsvE
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2SppqqnSJANEF7fniHyixLjMd
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/AnlgXgrR6BZ3aTKe2dWZExudZ
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/MSnVkOoCzTji9yXDPJC8f8aXL
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/1ITxnrAiPLq9XJPQbtrJlKuiE
Failure to furnish legible and translated copies of the documents supporting the preventive detention to the detune vitiates the detention order. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lAyMSkrkiQSbhIIptCvf9rovD
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/p5VrCehH28SNNeiS0bZ8KRv6p
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/gojWseGhQMnWDawPSZpKG73vX
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik T celebrates his 49th 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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OmixS2OMoTfqrljhC59QMaM87
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgments/actionRead/G2tTPI5bHvYyZTiETOTGZQLha
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ANlWC5PHPu3gpFfmASQ3WZaNd
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/keZ3qqoSRQqgW5vyM6SfGlEY3
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/37Cps6IbF6daKOOPQDXLDoBsC
Criminal complaints cannot be quashed merely on the ground that the allegations made out by the complainant are civil in nature. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aQHSxzvJXo61DwvpyGBpluiTb
Concept of ”reasonable doubt” in criminal cases. Authoritative judgment of the Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0WFP48GqP5ActPnAhC8lTcqIP
Suit for specific performance. When the defendant neither pleads nor leads evidence on hardship, Court shall decree the suit especially when the plaintiff proves readiness & willingness. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZYHIFcx04MWCD3uvVPPjBcDAm
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/P2eAMjn4QOZTLPewYr616ggyd
Courts must be liberal in allowing applications to record evidence of witnesses by Audio-Video Electronic means. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/EmFyIynuOrK6b8XofVRgK4CUZ
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/BecN0Gs6dZ7CCih7C1skDj6UK
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Eq3U7Bl1GRR2QN6cUG6BWbTzl
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ANlWC5PHPu3gpFfmASQ3WZaNd
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/keZ3qqoSRQqgW5vyM6SfGlEY3
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/37Cps6IbF6daKOOPQDXLDoBsC
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajendra Badamikar celebrates his 62nd birthday today.
| Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajendra Badamikar: Born on 01.06.1962 in Hubballi to late Sri. Muralidhar Balavant Rao Badamikar and to late Smt. Vijaya Muralidhar Badamikar of Rabkavi in Bagalkot district. Elder brother Ravindra Badamikar is a Retired Manager of Syndicate Bank and the younger brother Sri.Anand is staying in Rabkavi and doing transport business. Sister Smt.Rajashree is working as an Officer in Bank of India in Sangli, Maharashtra State. Studied primary and secondary education in M.V.Pattan Higher Secondary School, Rabkavi in Bagalkot district. Then, PUC was done in R.L.S. Science College at Belagavi. Completed B.Sc. Degree in Karnataka Science College, Dharwad in 1983 and 1 year studied in M.Sc. (zoology) in Karnataka University, Dharwad. Later on in 1984, joined LL.B (Special) Degree in JSS Sakri Law College, Hubballi and obtained degree in 1987 and also obtained III Rank in II-year LL.B from the Karnataka University, Dharwad. Enrolled as an Advocate in Karnataka State Bar Council, Bengaluru on 15.07.1987 and joined the Chambers of Sri. Shreekanth T. Patil, Advocate, Dharwad. Practiced both civil and criminal side in Dharwad and Hubballi. Married to Smt.Vandana D/o Sri.Srivallabharao R. Desai and Smt.Umabai Desai on 27.12.1994, who is also non-practicing Advocate. Son-Chi.Ashwin is studying in BE-III year. Appointed as Civil Judge on 18.10.1993 and worked in Chikkodi at Belagavi District; Chittapur at Kalaburagi District and in Belagavi from 29.11.1993 to 03.09.2002. Promoted as Senior Civil Judge on 04.09.2002 and worked as Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) in Hanagal, Haveri District till May 2006. Then, posted as Deputy Secretary to Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and Member Secretary to the High Court Legal Services Authority and served there till July 2009. Then attended competitive examination conducted by the High Court of Karnataka and promoted as District Judge and served as XII-Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, from July 2009 to May 2010. Then, transferred to Belagavi and served there as IV-Additional District and Sessions Judge (Lokayuktha Court), Belagavi District, upto May 2013. Then, transferred to Mysuru and served there as V-Additional District and Sessions Judge; III-Additional District and Sessions Judge; and Additional Prl. Family Judge and Prl. Family Judge, Mysuru from May 2013 to February 2015. Then, transferred to Kolar District and served as Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, from 28.02.2015 till 30.11.2016. Then, transferred to Tumakuru as Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru District and served there from 05.12.2016 till 13.09.2019. Then, posted as Registrar (Judicial) in High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru and served there from 16.09.2019 to 09.10.2019. Thereafter, posted as Registrar General and served in the said post from 09.10.2019 till elevation as Judge, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, on 25.03.2021 and Permanent Judge on 30.09.2022. |
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajendra Badamikar.
Negotiable Instruments. If the payee or holder of the cheque made alteration with the consent of drawer on cheque, such alteration cannot be a ground to resist right of payee or holder thereof. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kH1vqCHqMdMAlj6SfSaNprNaX
Petition under Section 438 or 439 of Cr.P.C is not maintainable for the offences under KPIDFE Act since appeal is provided under Section 16 of the KPIDFE Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HXWwsyWH6N64XHFiH3y51olKG
Motor Vehicles Act. Amount received under the Group Insurance Policy cannot be deducted from the compensation when no premium was paid by the employee under the Group Insurance Policy. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aEtzi8AHHAqnpQnzev9k4ZjQU
POCSO Act. Courts cannot impose lesser sentence than the one prescribed under the Act either before or after the amendment. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WdZTpEr51VieY9uLlIbaPJqmq
Criminal Procedure Code. Section 482. Frustrated litigants who have failed to succeed before the Civil Court initiating criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law. Such proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0HCAihfW6KOJHvZI2a8OvkQx3
IPC. Sections 198 and 420. General category candidate securing Scheduled Caster certificate. Allegations prima facie constitute cheating and the accused cannot be discharged. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aOPCPE5LawzoQQZtnnEtQXtHF
Karnataka High Court Act, 1961. Regular First Appeals filed before the 2007 amendment, whose value is less than Rs.15 lakhs, have to be heard by the Division Bench. Amendment applies only to appeals filed after 28 August 2007. (DB)
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/PXoK3UOnorXI9fFmo3hRJY72F
Dishonour of cheque issued towards time-barred debt/transaction cannot attract the provisions of Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LkQPfegqazddmbDA6OlacVNQl
Earning woman is equally responsible for maintaining the children. Such responsibility cannot be fastened solely on the husband. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/iht6HtGJtYFMWP1ZcA3Lwmqzt
Section 138 N.I. Act. If a case based on a private complaint ends in acquittal, it can be challenged only under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C before the High Court. Sessions Court has no jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/hNZz0JcH8D84PfCOKqmjK54Jz
Husband not making any provision for maintenance of the minor children also can be termed as domestic violence. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/SIlHhq3RxMrF2wq9dJbIEZpOa
Domestic Violence Act. Question of awarding maintenance till marriage of daughters does not arise and maintenance can be granted only till attainment of majority. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WZd1yLTTBFcix2m9m36hBSELc
Succession to property of a Sanyasi. Merely because a person wears cloth ordinarily worn by Sanyasi or by mere declaration, he cannot be termed that he has renounced the world. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/05gTtM5vgphtbnFgBxsqPlVmY
Order XXXI Civil Procedure Code. Suit by or against Public Trust without impleading all the Trustees, Executers and Administers is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/bLjKOCeGbivFPak7kGgjoMEx6
Rider of two-wheeler not possessing driving license. Insurance Company is NOT liable for compensation. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VtxHqMbCMFBvq62sksg47VJJU
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad celebrates his 58th 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. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uFQX1cP0kouUytzJDxeG92Oi3
Election petition cannot be dismissed for making the Returning Officer also a party to the petition. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8FSysCrnASfkaFoikx4UOigJG
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/p8zO0ZGW7XksPYJpkgHr06w5m
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OJSpKbBliSXbsjgLthOJiIZa9
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HbBtN5g8ZHicpKA3eaBENJyOJ
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/tsJQwNGQAsJMkrwaWTO5rSxwG
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/34PhY6MaKnAtiH8EBFGLfxtfx
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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NE07HynCfzPiR4fMF9YGwtq4V
Preventive detention. Order of detention can be passed even if detenue is in custody.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GGaNBZIymHBlGw8bmXOmV9H3W
“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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/z9lwayrdyWmzkfEGYLRyu9IPZ
“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.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/v4DaRpswmkujb2pDOyNZZ4abK
Motor Vehicles Act. Compensation can be claimed for the death of brother having regard to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ldLx2dGfOBkdQEgNaboqwzYgI
Acquisition of land granted under the Land Grant Rules. The grantee is entitled to compensation. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/tA0rvR03FtH972CpzBtf4cPm5
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/obIEjepHWhHReM5bg9cIRQJwa
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/t64ziXCqrqjncXCITtYnngaCB
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/saIIQO9EDmV2Av47ma0eTkdRE
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/AMzkGKiVoKG8rNaiAl00nR29v
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/UM4DZHd1M9OGZeWpsmaIiitGa
Unauthorized occupant cannot claim adverse possession in respect of property which belongs to statutory body. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Uo9YSV5zZUp096jAKS7SPQw5D
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act does not apply to lands granted to SC/ST persons under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2zKA1RXP1DEo521wWVUz8yyz8
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/zLUUx0vjC9A3vh6cNuri5mANd
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.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VlE0JoMbpdEjaK4fQWXe0kYWc
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Nawaz celebrates his 59th 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.
NDPS Act. Prosecution’s complaint failing to connect accused with seized material. Valid ground to grant bail to the accused.
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.
Anticipatory bail can be granted even after cognizance of an offence is taken and the chargesheet is filed. Karnataka High Court.
NDPS. Possession could mean physical possession with animus; exercise of dominion and control as a result of concealment; or personal knowledge as to the existence of the contraband and the intention based on such knowledge. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.Vishwajith Shetty celebrates his 57th 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.
Indian Penal Code. When accused is acquitted for the offence under Section 392 (Robbery), he cannot be convicted for the offence under Section 411 (Dishonestly receiving stolen property). 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.
“State has no power to regulate fee structure 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.
Prospective beneficiary has no right to question deletion of the land from the acquisition proceedings. 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.
Arbitration award. The date for quantifying the stamp duty payable on the award is the date on which the award was signed. 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 is NOT applicable in cases of mere agreements of sale without delivery of possession. 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.
Suo Motu action regarding functioning of the Juvenile Justice Boards in the State. Karnataka High Court issues interim directions.
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.
Karnataka High Court strikes down rule enabling collection of fee from transporter of minor minerals from other States into State of Karnataka.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Additional award under Section 33 forms part of the arbitral award. Remedy appeal and not Writ.
Karnataka High Court directs State Election Commission to hold elections for 198 Wards of BBMP at the earliest.
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.https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/IuaNAztXVjIOOCC8OSWiU9fCJ
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/assesseeaffected. 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.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Devdas celebrates his 55th 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.
Person taking advantage of a provision of law cannot raise challenge to it.
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. (DB)
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.
Will. Principles governing proof of Will and mode of proving Will explained. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
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. (DB)
CLARIFICATION – Second wife, married during life time of first wife, getting share in the property of deceased husband. Karnataka High Court Judgment. (DB)
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. (DB)
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. (DB)
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. (DB)
Detention order cannot be challenged by seeking a writ of habeas corpus when the order is already confirmed by the Government. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Standalone distilleries established for manufacturing ethanol are not governed by the provisions of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
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. (DB)
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. (DB)
There is no requirement of producing original title deeds for transfer of khata under the BBMP Act. Karnataka High Court.
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.
Order of cancellation of land grant which is not communicated to the grantees cannot be construed as an order in the eye of law. 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.
Entry in revenue records based on a Will. Karnataka High Court explains the procedure to be adopted.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj celebrates his 51th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj: Born on 14.05.1973. Graduated LL.B(Hons) at NLSIU. Enrolled as an Advocate on 23.06.1995.
Practiced in the field of Civil, Commercial Litigation, Contracts, Property Law, Arbitration, Company Law, Intellectual Property Rights, Constitution Matters, Debt Recovery, Environmental Law, Revenue Matters under local land laws, Consumer Law, RERA etc.,
Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 23.09.2019 and Permanent Judge on 01.03.2021.
Important judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj.
Labour Law. Dismissal of workman on the ground of loss of confidence of the employer in the workman would not prevent the Labour Court from passing an order of reinstatement. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/G1thv6CTExOr9SQw8qfSKKhfY
KT & CP Act. When designation of land in the Master Plan as park is lapsed due to non-acquisition within five years, the landowner is entitled for conversion of the land as per the new classification of the land under the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/nm19csYtxwSXa1tdrxwIQh09c
Industrial Disputes Act. An order refusing permission under Section 33(2)(b) can be challenged by way of a Writ Petition in appropriate cases. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wU4BZGazuANvvIEy3nX2gAaEl
Labour Law. Once a domestic enquiry is held to be fair and proper, the labour Court cannot hold the contents of the enquiry report to be perverse and set aside the order on that basis. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/G5c2pBGLNkC4UIw08dSOlV9Ny
Karnataka Societies Registration Act. Erstwhile office members cannot process election to the Society after the appointment of an administrator merely because the administrator has not taken charge. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wY4lFwKBfwBQLCXexQmFQkkzk
Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act. Special Officer cannot be appointed on the ground of resignation of directors without waiting for 15 days period prescribed under Section 29(B) to withdraw the resignations. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rDzZKvBC2pSsW4n8CtsM8QB0s
Change of land use is not required under the KTCP Act to run educational institution once the land is converted under the KLR Act for non-agricultural/educational purposes. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NTAWFiMBqmhSa1rvzC95Rw7Xi
Repair work of the building demolished for road widening, to make it usable, does not amount to re-construction. No action can be initiated under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Uyv3EtyG6nQ9NXYvYpnhgZPiL
Property derived by a female Hindu post the amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act would become her absolute property and a coparcenary or joint family cannot be created by or under her. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. Proceedings under Sections 79A and 79B can NOT be initiated after the agricultural land is converted to non-agricultural purpose. Karnataka High Court.
If possession of property is handed over before or subsequent to execution of document, stamp duty under Article 5(e)(i) of the Karnataka Stamp can NOT be levied. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition notification after 19 December 2013, the date on which the 2013 Act was notified to come into force on 1 January 2014, could be issued only under the 2013 Act and not under the 1894 Act. Karnataka High Court.
If possession of property is handed over before or subsequent to execution of document, stamp duty under Article 5(e)(i) of the Karnataka Stamp can NOT be levied. Karnataka High Court.
Workman cannot be dismissed without taking the approval of the Industrial Tribunal in terms of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act when proceedings are pending. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. If compensation of some landowners is enhanced, other landowners under same notification are automatically entitled to enhanced Compensation. Duty of the State to notify all other landowners about the enhancement. Karnataka High Court.
Trust registered under the Trust Act is entitled to get liquor license under the amended Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian & Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968. Karnataka High Court disposes Writ Petition challenging non-inclusion of Trusts.
Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 & Rules 1971. Notification under Section 10(1) is not a pre-requisite for the Tribunal to decide matters relating to reinstatement or regularization of services of contract labour. Karnataka High Court.
Proceedings under Section 79(A) & (B) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act can NOT be initiated against purchaser of converted agricultural property. Karnataka High Court.
Change of partners in a partnership concern holding excise license amounts to transfer of excise license. Authorities can cancel license for violation of condition against transfer of license. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Registration of a sale deed in respect of joint family property would amount to constructive notice to all members of the joint family SCST and the period of limitation would commence from the date of such registration. Karnataka High Court.
Labour Law. Dispute regarding termination can be raised before the Labour Court within whose jurisdiction the employee worked last and received the termination letter and not from the place of origin of termination letter. Karnataka High Court.
Cr.P.C. Sections 82 and 83. Even an agreement holder can challenge the attachment on the ground that he has an interest in the property provided the agreement is bonafide and not fraudulent. Karnataka High Court.
In a suit for partition filed by woman against her father/brother based on amended Section 6 Hindu Succession Act, joint family properties given to her husband as dowry can also be included. Karnataka High Court.
Labour Law. When workman files statutory appeal as also claim petition under section 10(4-A)of ID Act, in the event of either one of them being disposed, the other proceeding would become infructuous and required to be dismissed as such. Karnataka High Court
Claim made by a workmen for payment of minimum wages is not a dispute covered under Section 70 of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicle Act. Insurance company not limiting insurance policy till fitness certificate period can not escape liability on the ground that vehicle’s fitness certificate lapsed on the date of accident. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Procedure Code. Section 93. Search warrant can be issued by the Magistrate without issuing a summons under Section 91. Karnataka High Court.
Plaint in a suit for partition based on amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act is liable to be rejected if there is clear admission in the plaint about registered partition of ancestral properties prior to the amendment. Karnataka High Court.
Once the Disabilities Act comes into force, Circulars cannot be relied on to downgrade the cadre as also to fix the pay-scale as per the downgraded cadre. Karnataka High Court.
Forcible, unauthorised, Illegal encroachment of private property by BDA. Karnataka High Court orders allotment of equivalent developed land to the owner. Imposes cost of 5 lakhs to be recovered from the officers at default.
Valuation of Suit. Suit for specific performance. Only value of the property shown in the agreement has to be considered for the purpose of jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Premature transfer cannot be ordered simply because of the complaints against the public servant. Karnataka High Court.
Corporation carrying out perennial works through contractor employing Pourakarmikas. Karnataka High Court orders regularisation against sanctioned vacant posts.
Digitization of Criminal Investigation. Karnataka High Court issues comprehensive directions.
In case of termination of an individual employee/workman by a individual notice, a dispute can be raised by such individual workman in terms of Section 10(4-A) of the ID Act. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act. Increasing cases of minor girls above the age of 16 years having love/sexual relationship resulting in criminal prosecutions. Karnataka High Court asks Law Commission of India to rethink on the age criteria.
Digitalize the criminal investigation by videographing dying declaration and recording statements electronically with digital signatures. Karnataka High Court issues guidelines.
Mischief by killing or maiming animals. Mens rea, animus or intention is required to be established to constitute offences under Section 428 or Section 429 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Legal Metrology (Packed Commodities) Rules, 2011. Compounding of an offence by one accused will not prevent the other accused from seeking quashment of the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Mines And Minerals (Development AndRegulation) Act, 1957. Geologist can initiate criminal proceedings under Mines and Minerals for the offences under the Act.
Accident involving pet or animal does not attract the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act or the Indian Penal Code. Karnataka High Court.
When a document is fabricated before the Sub-Registrar, bar under Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.Capplies only to proceedings under Section 177 and not under Sections 419, 420, 468 and 471, IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Centre being run under the aegis of the High Court of Karnataka can appoint an Arbitrator if any of the parties individually or both the parties jointly were to approach the centre for such appointment. Karnataka High Court.
Legal Metrology (Packed Commodities) Rules, 2011. When liquid item is sold, the declaration in terms of weight/measures can be done either by weight or volume. Karnataka high Court.
Refusal to pay cost of the arbitration by a party cannot be a ground not to appoint arbitrator if the other party is ready to pay entire arbitration cost. Karnataka High Court.
An absconder cannot claim benefit of default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
Even an employee on a contractual basis is entitled to provident fund. There is no requirement of a master-servant relationship with the master exercising supervision and control over the employee. Karnataka High Court.
Accused is not entitled for default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. in the event of charge sheet having already been filed before his arrest. Karnataka High Court.
Gratuity is paid to safeguard financial security of a person at the time of retirement. Bank cannot adjust gratuity amount payable to its employee towards outstanding loan account. Karnataka High Court.
Merely because a client does not succeed in the matter and favourable orders were not passed in his favour, the client cannot make out a case that fraud and offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC has been committed by his Advocate. Karnataka High Court
Factories Act. Manufacture being per se hazardous does not make the establishment hazardous. The process of manufacture being hazardous for workmen of a particular age group is the relevant test. Karnataka High Court.
If a document has been fabricated for the purposes of usage in a Court and thereafter used in a Court, Section 195 of Cr.P.C. would come into play and only the Court can initiate the proceedings against the offender. Karnataka High Court.
Compensation towards drawing high-tension electricity lines. Karnataka High Court approves fixation of 50% of the land value as compensation.
Hindu Succession Act 1956. Karnataka amendment to Section 6 is applicable between 30:7:1994 to 8.9.2005. The Central amendment is applicable from 9:9:2005. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act 1956. Section 14 does NOT apply when there is admission by the woman and evidence on record that the property was purchased in her name from out of joint family funds. Karnataka High Court.
Financial moratorium. Writ against private banks to implement RBI Circular can be issued. Karnataka High Court.
RTI. Candidate can seek evaluated answer scripts from Public Service Commission. Karnataka High Court.
Information Technology Act. An intermediary or its directors and officers are not liable for any action or inaction on part of seller making use of facilities provided by the intermediary in terms of a website or market place. Karnataka High Court.
Bhoodan and Vidyadan Scheme. Owner cannot seek return of land once gifted. He can only seek direction for proper utilization of the land. Karnataka High Court.
Companies Act 2013. Except the Registrar Shareholder and Official Liquidator no other person can initiate any criminal proceedings against a company for the offences under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Director appointed by a Venture Capital Company can be prosecuted as regards criminal offences alleged against the company where investment is made. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. All the Directors of the Company cannot be automatically prosecuted for any violation of the Income Tax Act. There has to be specific allegations made against each of the Directors who is intended to be prosecuted. Karnataka High Court.
Educational Institutions. Property tax exemption would also apply to persons who have leased the property for educational purposes. Karnataka High Court.
Educational Institutions. Property tax exemption is available even to any land or building used for the purpose of educational institution or incidental thereto such as bank canteen and staff quarters. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002. Investigating-arresting Officer must inform and provide copy of arrest order and grounds of arrest to the person being arrested. Mere oral information would not be sufficient. Karnataka High Court.
SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989. High Court can NOT entertain bail petition under Section 438 & 439 Cr.P.C. Remedy against grant or refusal of bail by the Special Court is appeal to High Court under Section 14A. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Manner of deciding petition under Section 34 explained. Guidelines laid down. Karnataka High Court.
Local bodies. Consequences of conversion of Town Municipal Area into a City Municipal Area and absorbion of Panchayat into newly constituted City Municipal Council explained. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 80JJAA. Deduction in respect of employment of new workmen. Calendar year and not financial year is to be considered to compute completion of 300 days by the workmen. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Determination and enhancement of compensation by reference court being a judicial exercise, benefit of the same should be made available even to those who did not approach the Court. Karnataka High Court.
‘Total non application of mind’. Karnataka High Court quashes consent for establishment issued by Karnataka State Pollution Control Board for Karwar Port Expansion Project. Orders fresh exercise.
‘No instrumentality of the State or any litigant has a right to say that the order of the Court will not be complied with only because an ordinary copy of the order is supplied or that a certified copy is not supplied.’ Karnataka High Court.
Buildings used for the purpose of running educational institution and/or incidental activity are exempted from payment of property tax under the Karnataka Municipalities Act even without making application seeking exemption. Karnataka High Court.
Challenge to an award passed in an International Commercial Arbitration can be made before Commercial Division of a Single Judge Bench of the High Court. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act. Investigation Officer shall inform victim’s parents and legal counsel about bail application or any other application by the accused or the prosecution in the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Defendant whose written statement taken as not filed and on dismissal of his application under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can notseek permission to file written statement. Karnataka High Court.
Court can record compromise among parties even after auction of subject property is completed since successful auction purchaser has no vested right till sale certificate is issued in his favour. Karnataka High Court.
”Store information in electronic form and furnish upon receipt of application under the RTI Act at the earliest”. Karnataka High Court directs Government of Karnataka.
”Issue notice well in advance giving sufficient time to the assessee to furnish documents”. Karnataka High Court directs Income Tax Department.
Mere presentation of plaint without court fee does not amount to ‘filing of suit’. By the time court fee is paid, if limitation runs out, suit is liable to be dismissed. Karnataka High Court.
Police can NOT conduct preliminary enquiry when information disclosing commission of cognizable offence is received. Police can initiate such enquiry only after registering FIR. Karnataka High Court.
Defendant can seek injunction against plaintiff only under Order 39 Rule 1(a). He has no right to seek such injunction under Order 39 Rule (b) and (c). Karnataka High Court reiterates.
If roster is not followed for the post of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of a local body in an election, persons belonging to that category must be accommodated in the next election. Karnataka High Court.
Impounding of entire sale agreement in a suit for specific performance for non payment of stamp duty is mandatory even though the suit is confined only one of several properties. Karnataka High Court.
When a compromise is filed before the Court, only that Court must record the compromise. The matter cannot be referred to the Lok- Adalat. Karnataka High Court.
Plaintiff in a suit cannot array defendant as represented by GPA holder with address of the said GPA holder without showing address of the defendant. Karnataka High Court.
Appellate Court cannot decide criminal appeal before it by taking into account evidence recorded in another case even though it might be a cross-case or a counter case. Karnataka High Court issues exhaustive guidelines.
Electricity companies must insure power lines and equipments against any act of nature and claims arising out of electrocution of persons or destruction of crops. Karnataka High Court.
Call received on Police helpline disclosing cognizable offence shall also be considered as information for registering FIR. Karnataka High Court.
One of the parties to a contract cannot delay appointment of Arbitrator by adopting multi-layered methodology to be gone through by the other party before invocation of Arbitration clause. Karnataka High Court.
Grant of compensation towards loss due to erection of towers and drawing electricity lines based on sale price of adjacent land is correct. Law Commission must suggest payment of suitable compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Allottee of a civic amenity site is not barred from seeking allotment of adjacent civic amenity site for expansion. Authority must consider the applications transparently. Karnataka High Court.
”Train the Officers exercising quasi-judicial powers to write proper orders instead of adopting copy and paste method”. Karnataka High Court directs the State Government.
”Upload and update contact details of persons in-charge of litigation in the local bodies on the official websites for the effective service of court notices’’. Karnataka High Court directs the Principal Secretary to Govt.
Even if the plaintiff has not sought a relief of possession in a suit for specific performance, the Execution Court can issue a delivery warrant directing the Judgment debtor to handover possession of the property. Karnataka High Court.
‘’Only under extreme circumstances handcuffing of an accused can be resorted to.’’ Karnataka High Court orders compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs to law student who was illegally handcuffed by the Police.
Labour Law. Dispute regarding termination can be raised before the Labour Court within whose jurisdiction the employee worked last and received the termination letter and not from the place of origin of termination letter. Karnataka High Court.
Public duty is cast on the Municipal authorities to safeguard the citizens from attack of street dogs. Karnataka High Court issues exhaustive directions/guidelines. Orders Rs. 10 lakhs compensation to the father of the child killed by street dogs.
Land acquisition compensation must be paid in the event of any enhancement granted to another land looser under the same notification. Karnataka High Court deprecates delay in considering applications of landowners.
Set up e-office system and information technology tools to monitor applications/representations and to dispose them at the earliest. Karnataka High Court directs BDA.
Demarcation of land in the Master Plan for road widening would not vest the land with the State/BDA. State/BDA cannot seek relinquishment of such land as a pre-condition for plan sanction without paying compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Lapse of scheme under the BDA Act. Dismissal of earlier writ petition for want of particulars does not preclude fresh writ petition with additional material/grounds. Karnataka High Court.
Compensation and resettlement methodology as determinable under the land acquisition Act of 2013 is applicable to the acquisition made under National Highways Act. Karnataka High Court.
Lapse of Scheme under the Bangalore Development Authority Act would invalidate designation of property as a civic amenity and all further actions taken in connection thereto. Karnataka High Court.
Acquisition under the BDA Act. Land loser can choose compensation in the form of land or site instead of cash anytimebefore he actually withdraws the cash compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Winding up proceedings can continue even after payment of principal amount if contractual, crystallized and admitted interest on the principal amount is not paid. Karnataka High Court.
‘Arresting Officer Must Ascertain Identity of the person’. Karnataka High Court orders Rs. 5 lakhs compensation to man wrongly arrested.
Foreign award in respect of parties situated outside India can be executed in India if property of the award debtor is situated within India Karnataka High Court.
RERA Act prevails over the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. When proceedings are already initiated before the RERA Authority, application for appointment of Arbitrator to decide the same dispute cannot be entertained. Karnataka High Court.
Though there is no bar for appointment of former employee as an arbitrator, if there are justifiable doubts regarding his impartiality, Court can refuse to appoint him as arbitrator. Karnataka High Court.
When an arbitration agreement binds only one of the several persons who are parties to a dispute, the cause of action cannot be split. Arbitrator cannot be appointed in such circumstances. Karnataka High Court.
When grievance is against Company for dishonest misappropriation of property, it is necessary to make the Company accused in the criminal proceedings under Section 403 IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Payment of land acquisition compensation cannot be delayed on the ground that there is a dispute pending between the acquiring body and the Income Tax Department. Karnataka High Court.
Amount deducted under Section 194-LA of the Income Tax Act from and out of land acquisition compensation also forms part of compensation payable to owner. Karnataka High Court.
Compensation towards drawing high-tension electricity lines. Karnataka High Court approves fixation of 50% of the land value as compensation.
“Conduct of party in participating in arbitral proceedings and then blaming the arbitrator is against the basic notion of justice”. Karnataka High Court imposes cost of Rs. 5 lakhs on ITI Limited.
Mere pendency of writ petition or writ appeal or SLP will not extend time to pass award under the Land Acquisition Act unless interim orders prevented passing of the award. Karnataka High Court.
A proprietary concern is not required to be arrayed as a separate party in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
Accused is not entitled for default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. in the event of charge sheet having already been filed before his arrest. Karnataka High Court.
Once the Disabilities Act comes into force, Circulars cannot be relied on to downgrade the cadre as also to fix the pay-scale as per the downgraded cadre. Karnataka High Court.
Cr.P.C. Sections 82 and 83. Even an agreement holder can challenge the attachment on the ground that he has an interest in the property provided the agreement is bonafide and not fraudulent. Karnataka High Court.
Prohibition of transfer under the Karnataka SC/ST PTCL Act do not apply to auction sale of property by Banks including Co-operative Society and Cooperative Bank towards loan recovery. Karnataka High Court.
BBMP property tax on Educational Institutions. Karnataka High Court strikes down the Government Circular and BBMP tax demand in view of the amendment.
Planning Authority insisting for surrender of land free of cost for national highway at the time of plan sanction amounts to extortion and cannot be sustained. Karnataka High Court.
Building plan sanctioned under Master Plan cannot be invalidated because of the subsequent withdrawal of the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court.
Urban Development Authority cannot demand surrender of land free of cost when the owner applies for building plan and khatha. Karnataka High Court.
Urban Planning. BBMP cannot refuse to maintain passage/street on the ground that the said passage/street has not been handed over to the BBMP under a relinquishment deed. Karnataka High Court.
Tenants of Municipal Corporation cannot claim equity on the basis of long standingusage of the premises so as to be allotted shops in newly constructed building without going to the process of auction. Karnataka High Court.
Labour Law. Under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, Labour Court can determine employer and employee relationship, amounts due to workman and direct the payment thereof. Karnataka High Court.
Industrial Disputes Act. Consequential benefits upon reinstatement include earned leave and encashment of earned leave. Karnataka High Court.
Electricity Act, 2003. Karnataka High Court directs e-filing, e-appearance and other e-services to be made available by all national tribunals within 6 months.
State Electricity Regulation Commission has no power to regulate inter-State power transmission since it falls only within the domain of the Central Electricity Regulation Commission. Karnataka High Court.
Property Tax. Residential property used for running Advocate’s office cannot be assessed as commercial property if it falls within the exemption under Section 3 (1) (e) of Karnataka Shops and Establishments Act. Karnataka High Court.
”Award of death sentence must be preceded by psychological and physiological evaluation, examination of early and present family background, history of violence and criminal antecedent of the accused”. Karnataka High Court lays down guidelines.
Deemed conversion of land under Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 shall be strictly adhered to by the officers when the objections raised are complied with. Karnataka High Court.
Ancestral property fallen to the share of father in a family partition among his father and brothers cannot be claimed by his son since the property so allocated to his share becomes his exclusive property. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Rules 1978 continue to be in force even after coming into force of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 and govern the disciplinary proceedings initiated. Karnataka High Court.
A party seeking to lead evidence through a general or special power of attorney need not make a separate application seeking permission to lead such evidence in the matter. Karnataka High Court.
Labour Law. Once domestic enquiry is held to be not proper or fair, employer can lead further evidence to establish the delinquency of the workman unless such evidence has already been led before the Labour Court. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Societies Registration Act. Merely because third party were to submit complaint, the Registrar cannot initiate an enquiry under Section 25 without application of his mind. Karnataka High Court.
All lands, agricultural and non-agricultural, acquired under the land acquisition Act of 2013 are exempted from payment of Income Tax. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Once a Plaintiff contends that he has separated from the joint family, properties bought subsequent to the said separation cannot be included in the suit for partition filed subsequently. Karnataka High Court.
Failure to declare assets and liabilities. Defaulting member of a Gram Panchayat need not to be issued a show cause notice or be heard before removal from the office. Karnataka High Court.
When complaint and counter complaint are filed making identical allegations, accused in one complaint cannot seek quashment of the complaint on the ground that the allegations are civil in nature. Karnataka High Court.
Public charitable trust need not obtain permission from the jurisdictional District Court in order to file suit against a third party. Karnataka High Court.
Reservation of posts in excess of 50% to SC and ST category under the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act is not ultravires the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act. Period of 30 months for Adhyaksha/Upadhyakshah has to be calculated from the date of result of the election. The delay in holding the first meeting would not add any period to their term. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act. Holding contractor’s licence under the GESCOM/KPTCL amounts to an ‘office of profit’. Such person is disqualified from contesting election. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Appointment of court commissioner during the proceedings to find out the existence of building etc would be unnecessary since such an exercise can be undertaken at the time of final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Workmen’s Compensation Act. Mere deposit of award amount with interest before the appellate court while challenging the award will not absolve the appellant from paying interest till the realisation of the award. Karnataka High Court.
Anti-Corruption Law & Service Rules. Borrowing authority can entrust an enquiry to the Lokayukta without obtaining prior permission/ approval of the lending authority. Karnataka High Court.
Registration of FIRs. Karnataka High Court directs DGP to issue Circular to all Station House Officers to follow directions issued in Lalita Kumari’s case. Circular to indicate disciplinary proceedings in case of lapse.
Karnataka High Court directs integration of Police IT with Road Accident Data Base, Forensic Laboratory Management System, Insurance Companies and Transport Department for the effective redressal of motor vehicle accident victims.
Application for Parole cannot be rejected merely because an appeal against conviction is pending. Karnataka High Court.
Election Petition without arraigning all the candidates to an election in an election petition where a declaration of the petitioner to be a returned candidate is sought for is liable to be dismissed. Karnataka High Court.
Election Law. Non-disclosure or suppression of the assets of the candidate or his his/her spouse in his nomination amounts to corrupt practice. Karnataka High Court.
Road Transport Corporation. Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act is required to be complied with only if punishment of discharge or dismissal is made and not in respect of other punishments. Karnataka High Court.
Mere demarcation of land in the Master Plan for road widening would not amount to acquisition. State can either acquire the land by paying compensation or return it to owner. Karnataka High Court.
“Living person cannot be deprived of a benefit of a death certificate of a person who is dead”. Karnataka High Courts directs BBMP to issue death certificate of employee washed away in heavy rain while working in a stormwater drain.
Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. Once a sale deed is registered Sub-Registrar shall forward details within thirty days to Tahsildar and Tahsildar is bound to make entries in Mutation Register. Parties need not do anything in this regard. Karnataka High Court.
Urban Land Ceiling (Repeal) Act, 1999. Merely on the basis of deemed vesting the State cannot take over land when the proceedings under ULC Act for vesting of land has not been completed by taking actual possession of the land. Karnataka High Court.
Child on attaining majority can seek his/her name to be incorporated in the Birth Certificate. The Corporation cannot reject such plea on the ground of delay. Karnataka High Court.
Poultry farm activity on agricultural land is not a commercial activity and hence Panchayat cannot levy tax. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. Without the issuance of a notice under Section 321 (1) a Confirmatory Order cannot be passed under Section 321 (3) based only on the notice under Section 308. Karnataka High Court.
Except on sufficient grounds, Commercial Court cannot permit a party to lead fresh evidence after the matter is posted for arguments and when the witness was not named in the list of witnesses and affidavit was not filed. Karnataka High Court.
Public Works Department cannot permit construction on the road margin on a State Highway or a Major Highway. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka State Dispute Resolution Policy, 2021. Inter-departmental disputes can be adjudicated before the Interdepartmental Dispute Redressal Committee even after the dispute has arisen. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration clause in a Governmentcontract or civil remedy is not a bar for the High Court to exercise jurisdiction if the payment is arbitrarily withheld. Karnataka High Court.
Property classified as ‘commercial axes’ can be used for commercial purposes though the property is situated in a residential layout. Karnataka High Court.
Person elected from General Category to a Gram Panchayath as a Member can at a later point of time contest for the post of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha in a reserved category so long as he belongs to such reserved category. Karnataka High Court.
MUDA. Successive applications made for site though of different measurements shall be taken into consideration for determining the seniority for the purpose of allotment of site. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Proceedings under Section 79(A) & (B) cannot be initiated against a person who has purchased converted property after following necessary procedure under Section 95. Karnataka High Court.
New document cannot be produced in a Final Decree Proceedings which would have the effect of re-deciding the rights between the parties already decided in a preliminary decree. Karnataka High Court.
Civil Court has no power to modify or rectify the details of the property granted under the Karnataka Inams Abolition Act by the Special Deputy Commissioner. Karnataka High Court.
Gram Panchayat. Protection against no-confidence motion against president/VP who assume office after resignation, disqualification or death of the first elected President/VP would not go beyond earlier incumbents’ period. Karnataka High Court.
BBMP has no power to enquire into an allegation of encroachment simpliciter unless the encroachment is in violation of sanctioned plan. Karnataka High Court.
Daksha Legal