Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi V. Hosmani celebrates his 54th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Venkappa Hosmani: Born on 29.07.1971. Enrolled as an Advocate on 07.07.1995 at Bengaluru. Started practice before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore both on the Original and Appellate stages in Writ Jurisdiction as well as on the Civil Appellate side. Also appeared before the Trial Courts, Appellate Authorities, Tribunals etc. And from July 2008 practised before the High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench. Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 07.01.2020 and Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Important judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi V Hosamani.
The specified value and suit valuation in IPR suits below Rs. 3 lakhs shall be examined by the Courts to ensure it is not arbitrary or unreasonable and the suit is not undervalued. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Death of employee. Amount received by dependents under group insurance scheme is NOT a pecuniary advantage and can NOT be deducted from the MVC compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. Testimony of a witness who identified the accused for the first time in Court without knowing him before, and in the absence of any Test Identification Parade, would be valueless and unreliable. Karnataka High Court.
When suit for specific performance is dismissed and in the absence of prayer against dispossession, defendant/owner has a right to get back possession of the property in accordance with law. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Défense of prior partition becomes weak when revenue entries do not stand separately and exclusively in the name of the family members. Karnataka High Court.
Defendant cannot be placed exparte merely on process server report unless the court is satisfied that each one of the steps contemplated for service of notice is complied with. Karnataka High Court.
A co-owner cannot seek temporary injunction against another co-owner on the ground of adverse possession unless there is a partition of the property by metes and bounds. Karnataka High Court.
Registration Act. When refusal of registration is endorsed on a deed, the only remedy is appeal under Section 72. The refusal cannot be recalled under Section 68(2). Karnataka High Court.
A husband, as a Class-I heir, is entitled to compensation for loss of dependency due to the death of his wife in a motor vehicle accident, unless the insurer can conclusively prove separation or a second marriage. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for declaration of title based on mere mutation entries without written and registered instrument of title in suit property cannot be decreed. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of Property Act. Duration of lease of immovable property for agricultural or manufacturing purposes under Section 106 need not necessarily be from year to year when the contract between the parties is for a lesser period. Karnataka High Court.
Intestate succession. Deceased leaving his brother and widow of his second brother. Brother, as Class-II heir, excludes the widow who falls in entry VI. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipalities Act. Without issuing Notification specifying the area within which construction is prohibited, action cannot be initiated under Section 189 of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
When property is registered as Wakf contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice, such registration is liable to be quashed without driving the aggrieved parties to avail alternate remedy. Karnataka High Court.
The active involvement of beneficiaries in the preparation of a Will is a significant factor that can raise suspicions about the document’s authenticity and potentially discredit it. Karnataka High Court.
Specific performance. Lack of pleadings in a particular format cannot be a ground to deny specific performance of the agreement when the plaintiff exhibits blemishless conduct, readiness and willingness. Karnataka High Court.
Partition. Merely establishing sufficient income from HUF properties, plaintiff cannot seek to lay claim property on the basis of general presumption without specific evidence that it was purchased with HUF funds. Karnataka High Court.
When suit for specific performance is dismissed and in the absence of prayer against dispossession, defendant/owner has a right to get back possession of the property in accordance with law. Karnataka High Court.
An ex-parte decree can be challenged in a regular appeal under Section 96 CPC for improper summons service, even without availing the remedy under Order IX Rule 13, especially if procedural irregularities or factual discrepancies regarding service are evident from the record. Karnataka High Court.
Interim maintenance for a wife and child should be granted consistently, liberally to ensure survival during proceedings. An order denying interim maintenance to a wife while granting it to the child, without sufficient grounds, is unsustainable, especially when considering the respondent’s admitted high income. Karnataka High Court.
A husband, as a Class-I heir, is entitled to compensation for loss of dependency due to the death of his wife in a motor vehicle accident, unless the insurer can conclusively prove separation or a second marriage. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Krishna S. Dixit celebrates his 61st birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Krishna S. Dixit: Honourable Justice Mr. Krishna S. Dixit enrolled as an advocate in July 1989. Since then he was practising in the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka & High Court of Madras, specializing in Law of Writs, Election Laws & Service Laws. He was appearing in cases before the Service Law Tribunals of several States. He was appointed as the Senior Standing Counsel for the Election Commission of India and also as an Addl. Central Government Standing Counsel since 1999.
He was Panel Counsel for few Nationalized Banks. He was also a para academician and a part-time lecturer in a Law College in Bengaluru for few years. He was contributing articles to a few Kannada & English Newspapers & magazines. He also participated in several television debates on matters of contemporary relevance.
Having been appointed as the Assistant Solicitor General of India in the year 2014, he was appearing for the Central Government in numerous important cases till his Elevation as a Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14th February 2018.
Important judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Krishna S Dixit.
Cr.P.C. Incriminating material. Can be utilized against the accused only if the same is brought to his attention with opportunity to explain it.
Dying Declaration anatomised- “Death waiting at the doorsteps gives a unique serenity to the mind compelling the maker to state nothing but the truth.”
Private Schools. State action should be facilitative and complimentary to the establishment of private schools. “Don’t compare grant of permission to start educational institution with that of a wine shop. Adopt fair standards”.
Civil Procedure Code. Transposition of Defendant as Plaintiff. Filing of counterclaim by defendant is not a condition for transposition. What is required for transposition is not the Counterclaim but an identity of interest. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of Property Act 1882. Section 114. Relief against forfeiture for non-payment of rent. The section does NOT come to the rescue of a tenant who lacks bonafides in conduct. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Amendment to Section 8. Application by any person claiming through or under the party to arbitration agreement-is prospective and does NOT apply to suits instituted prior to 23:10:2015. Karnataka High Court.
‘Perjury has become a way of life in the Law Courts.’ – Karnataka High Court while dismissing appeal arising out of a false claim under the Motor Vehicles Act with exemplary costs.
Electricity Supply. Purchaser of industry is liable to pay arrears towards electricity supply to earlier owner. However, there shall be apportionment of purchaser’s liability when only a part of industry is purchased. Karnataka High Court.
Bank loans. One Time Settlement. Once the OTS payment is made by the principal borrower, the surety is also discharged. Law on One Time Settlement discussed. Karnataka High Court.
Muslim man marrying second wife. First wife can stay away from the matrimonial home, seek divorce and retain exclusive custody of her minor child. Karnataka High Court.
Games of skill involve elements of expression and enjoy protection under Article 19(1)(a). State cannot criminalize online games involving skill. Karnataka High Court.
Once the lands have vested in the State for a public purpose, the erstwhile owners cannot seek their restoration on the ground that they were put to use for some other public purpose. Karnataka High Court.
SC /ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act),1989 is prospective in operation. No prosecution for the acts committed prior to coming into force of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Renewal of passport. Authorities cannot insist on production of facilitative order from the Court simply because criminal case is pending against the passport holder. Karnataka High Court.
“Political rallies have some elements of dissemination of knowledge & information to the public at large and they generate lot of political awareness in the voting masses”. Karnataka High Court on PM Modi’s Road Show.
Only in rare circumstances a lady acquires the caste status of her husband provided she pleads and proves her admission to the community of the husband by social acceptance. Karnataka High Court.
”Vajpayee led NDA–Government was toppled for want of one vote.” Election set aside by a very small margin is not a ground to set aside judgement in election petition. Karnataka High Court.
Lodging of accounts of electoral expenditure is aimed at transparency, purity and accountability. Disqualification due to failure cannot be avoided on flimsy grounds. Karnataka High Court.
“Delay in completion of acquisition and payment of compensation is akin to State taking away the ‘oxygen mask’ from the gasping patient”. Karnataka High Court. permits landowner to sell 50% of the land under acquisition to payoff debts.
”Judges some times make law if the statutes made by the Parliament fall short of meeting the requirements of the time”. Karnataka High Court while awarding just compensation in motor vehicle case.
Motor Vehicle Tribunal should adopt philosophy of the Constitution of India on ‘life’ and ‘dignity of human-being’ in assessing loss of future prospects to award just compensation. Karnataka High Court.
Universities are not the notional extensions of the government departments, nor their vassals. Govt should stop poking nose in the affairs of the Universities. Karnataka High Court.
Ordinarily in matters of recruitment, only aggrieved candidate can complain against illegalities in the process. Association of employees cannot espouse individual/personal cause of its members. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition cannot be frowned upon for lack of detailed consideration in Section 5-A report unless it is shown to be violative of provisions of the Act or in colourable exercise of power. Karnataka High Court.
Courts cannot don the hat of a town planner or that of an Accountant to minutely examine a lesser extent of land would have fulfilled the objective or whether the project could have been implemented satisfactorily at another location. Karnataka High Court.
Substantial question of law under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act need not necessarily be a question of law of general importance. Karnataka High Court explains the meaning and scope of Section 260A. (DB)
”Ordinarily, in civilized jurisdictions functionaries of the constitutional bodies are not subjected to subpoena”. Karnataka High Court, while setting aside summons issued to the Election Commissioner of India in election petition.
Sale of explosive substance being ‘res extra commercium’ like the liquor, poison, etc., no citizen can claim an unrestricted fundamental right. Karnataka High Court.
Re-determination of property tax by the Corporation under the KMC Act without prior consultation with Property Tax Board is impermissible. Karnataka High Court.
Transactions between banker and borrower are purely contractual. Private lending agency/Bank does not fit into the term ‘other authorities’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. Karnataka High Court.
Intra-Court appeal is maintainable against an interlocutory order passed in an Election Petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Karnataka High Court.
“The dead have no rights and can suffer no wrongs’’ (G W Paton). Section 394 Cr.P.C. providing for abatement of proceedings on the death of the accused is not unconstitutional. Karnataka High Court.
”Mere possibility of ‘grave consequences’ is no ground to quash proceedings under Section 26 of the Competition Act, 2002”. Karnataka High Court imposes cost of Rs. 10 lakhs on Intel for abusing process of Court.
Unless there is a ‘true dispute’ between the parties, arbitration clause in government contracts cannot be invoked on the basis of a ‘make believe dispute’ to withhold bills. Karnataka High Court.
An accused who secures anticipatory bail with condition to co-operate in the investigation cannot normally seek quashment of the criminal proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Writ petition is maintainable against banks like Punjab National Bank functioning under the umbrella of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987. Karnataka High Court.
Where the Statute does not prescribe the minimum fine amount, but, only prescribes the maximum, the authority levying substantial amount as fine has to give cogent reasons in support thereof. Karnataka High Court.
Renewable energy. Licensing authority must take appropriate measures at the time of granting license to see that huge projects are not imperilled by avoidable litigations. Karnataka High Court.
Federation of Karnataka Chambers of Commerce and Industry is not ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Merely because the avowed objects of a private body linguistically partake the nature of certain functions which ordinarily governmental bodies do, it does not thereby become a limb or agency of the State. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977. Application in Form 1 seeking regrant of land filed after 31 March 1991 cannot be entertained by the Land Tribunal.
Devotees can question grant of occupancy rights in favour of Archak/Poojary under the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977. Karnataka High Court.
“Principle that the tiller of the land should be conferred occupancy rights is not applicable to the lands held by the Ex-serviceman”. Karnataka High Court orders restoration of tenanted lands to Soldier.
Punja lands in Dakshina Kannada District can be brought under cultivation and occupancy rights can be granted u/s 48A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Tenancy cannot be claimed against a person who is not a landlord even within the extended definition. Karnataka High Court quashes Land Tribunal order after 25 years.
Government cannot act as a robber of citizens lands; taking away private lands for the purported public purpose without compensation against the spirit of constitutional guarantee enacted u/a 300A. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Enormous delay in passing awards. Karnataka High Court awards additional interest at 12% per annum from the date of the notification/possession.
When a public function/duty is to be discharged by a statutory authority, even when no time period is prescribed, the same has to be done within a reasonable time. Karnataka High Court.
‘Our Constitution is founded on human values’. Displaced slum dwellers who were granted Hakku Patraas and Possession Certificates are also entitled to Transferable Development Rights. Karnataka High Court.
Acquiring body denotifying land from the acquisition proceedings; retaining the possession and allotting the land for industrial purposes. Fresh acquisition proceedings to rectify the mistake cannot be said to be illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Forcible takeover of land for road widening simply because other landowners voluntarily surrendered their lands is impermissible. Karnataka High Court restrains Govt from interfering with landowners properties except in accordance with law.
‘Doctrine of Substituted Security’ entitles mortgagee to anything that is substituted for the mortgaged property. Bank can claim compensation amount if the mortgaged property is acquired. Karnataka High Court.
Acquisition of lands under the National Highways Act, 1956. Landowners are entitled for solatium as if the acquisition has been made under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Karnataka High Court.
The amendment of 2022 to the KIADB Act incorporating the provisions of land acquisition 2013 Act is prospective in operation, notwithstanding the word ‘deemed’ occurring therein. Karnataka High Court.
Decree for specific performance of sale agreement against allottee of a site can be enforced against the allotter BDA even when the BDA was not a party to the suit. Karnataka High Court.
When a judgment is stayed, ordinarily, it is not prudent to press them into service as a binding rule, since its precedential force is in suspended animation. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka High Court invokes the principle of “Full faith and credit clause” under Article 261 to bind statutory body BDA to comply with intra-party decree even though BDA was not party to the suit.
“Records of acquisition proceedings missing” cannot be pleaded in a Writ Petition to declare lapsing of acquisition proceedings especially when the names of the owners continue in the revenue records. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Section 133. Where the RTC entries are made without any ‘title facts’ such as grants, alienations, they do not enjoy presumptive value even if they are long standing. Karnataka High Court.
”It is incongruous not to acknowledge the contribution of Veerashaiva/Lingayat Mutts in achieving the constitutional aspiration of eradicating illiteracy and its associated evils by providing free education without discrimination”. Karnataka High Court.
Transferable Development Rights. Once lands are surrendered by the owners, State is bound to issue TDR. State cannot contend that the lands are no longer required. Karnataka High Court.
Confinement of Pontiff in prison/custody cannot be a ground to appoint Administrator to the Mutt in the absence of legislative sanction. Karnataka High Court.
“The Act is aimed at ‘distribution of material resources of community’ in the sense of Article 39(b) of the Constitution.” Karnataka High Court upholds the validity of the Karnataka Conferment of Ownership on Mulageni or Volamulageni Tenants Act.
Copyright infringement. Merely because a civil dispute is being fought between the parties, the criminal proceedings cannot be halted, per se, on that ground. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Corruption Act. Giving effect to the orders of the superior officer/authority is part of official duty and cannot be construed as misconduct. Karnataka High Court.
We are living in different times, of terrorism. ‘’Bail is a rule & jail is an exception’’ has spent itself when it comes to acts of terrorism. Karnataka High Court reject bail plea of accused involved in ‘K.G.Halli Riots’.
Abuse of social media is antithetical to the democratic process which has led to manipulation and fragmentation of society on the tainted lines of political ideologies. It alters civic engagement that may hijack democracy. Karnataka High Court.
Information Technology Act. Power to block under section 69A(1) of the Act read with Website Blocking Rules is not tweet-specific but extends to user accounts in their entirety. Karnataka High Court.
Education. Admission to Government seats in professional colleges. Persons of Indian Origin and Overseas Citizen of India cannot be treated as Non Resident Indian.
Merely because a particular evidence which ought to have been adduced but had not been adduced, the Appellate Court cannot adopt the soft course of remanding the matter. Supreme Court.
Allotment and conditional sale deed of Civic Amenity site to establish private educational institution can be cancelled if the purpose is not fulfilled by the allottee. Karnataka High Court.
Even the Minority Educational Institutions are bound to follow the Karnataka Education Act in the matter of service conditions of its employees. Karnataka High Court.
‘’Fraud, suppression of material facts and the systematic abuse of law and judicial process is a ground to review the Court judgment’’. Karnataka High Court imposes exemplary costs on the ex MLA for obtaining the judgment by fraud.
Compassionate appointment. ‘’bharta rakshati yavvane…’’ it is the duty of husband to provide maintenance to his dependent wife. A married daughter residing in matrimonial home ordinarily cannot be treated as a dependent on her father. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act. Provisions of CPC and the Indian Evidence Act do not strictly apply to the Election Petition proceedings under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
General proposition that Service Tax can be passed on by the service provider to the recipient of service does not apply when the service provider has already remitted certain sums of money to the service recipient. Karnataka High Court.
Writ of Prohibition cannot be issued in anticipation on par with the criminal courts granting anticipatory bail in the absence of infringement of right or at least a well-founded apprehension of infringement. Karnataka High Court.
Caste certificate cannot be construed as a China Wall that prevents any action being taken. Caste certificate secured by playing fraud can be rescinded in an appropriate proceeding. Karnataka High Court.
Report of C&AG/AG cannot be the basis for fastening of liability when the foundational facts on which such liability is sought to be levied, is disputed by one of the parties to the contract. Karnataka High Court.
Doctrine of alternate remedy is only a judicial invention and not a constitutional constraint; it is not a China Wall built between the Writ Court and the litigants. Karnataka High Court.
If a contract involves sufficient intrinsic material to catapult it to the realm of public law, the principles of natural justice apply while adjudging the breach of such a contract. Karnataka High Court.
Citizen adjudged innocent after a due trial cannot be subjected to fresh investigation or trial in Public Interest Litigation jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
“The provisions of parole/furlough are structured on humanistic grounds for the reprieve of those lodged in gaols for long”. Karnataka High Court while ordering parole to Muslim man to perform nikah of his daughter.
Foreign nationals over-staying in India disobeying Leave India Notices cannot be granted indulgence by the constitutional courts. Karnataka High Court.
’A borrower is a borrower, whether he is a practising lawyer or a sitting Judge. Loan laws do not provide for favourable treatment to them when they become chronic defaulters.’ Karnataka High Court.
‘’A lender cannot lend his ears for cock & bull stories of the borrower’’. Karnataka High Court rejects plea of Senior Advocate & chronic loan defaulter challenging loan recovery proceedings.
‘Life is lost in living’. Matrimonial case involving prayer for dissolution of marriage should be decided at the earliest so that in the event of decree, the parties may restructure their lives. Karnataka High Court.
A banker who answers description of State under Article 12 of the Constitution cannot act like a private lender. Abrupt stoppage of release of sanctioned loan is justiciable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
General proposition that Service Tax can be passed on by the service provider to the recipient of service does not apply when the service provider has already remitted certain sums of money to the service recipient. Karnataka High Court.
Writ Petition challenging the order in Election Petition before the Tribunal/Civil Judge. Intra-Court Writ Appeal is not maintainable against the order in the Writ Petition. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Pursuant to the amendment removing the bar to acquire agricultural lands, an entity which was prohibited from owning and possessing agricultural land can claim occupancy rights. Karnataka High Court.
Decision in the writ proceedings becomes res judicata in the subsequent proceedings relating to the same subject matter involving the issue dealt with in the writ petition. Karnataka High Court.
Authority entertaining proceedings barred by limitation without adverting to condoning delay acts without jurisdiction or in usurpation of jurisdiction. Karnataka High Court.
Rule of continuity of Government. Mistakes committed by the party in power earlier can be corrected only by following due process of law lest it gives scope for the allegation of legal malafide. Karnataka High Court.
Appeal is a continuation of the original proceeding and therefore both the Appeal and the original proceeding can be withdrawn with the leave of court unconditionally. Karnataka High Court.
When a Constitutional Court quashes a legislation or a delegated legislation, the operation of such quashment transcends the parties to the lis and operates as against all others, who were not parties eo nomine or persons claiming under them. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Grant of land only for the purpose of growing trees does not confer title on the grantee. Compensation is payable only for the trees grown by the grantee and not for the land. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969. Government cannot favour one single entity by using power under Rule 27 when many other similarly circumstanced aspirants are in the fray. Karnataka High Court.
‘Persons in public employment are not slaves of the Government, nor of their higher ups in the echelon of administration’. Karnataka High Court quashes dismissal order against public servant honorably acquitted in the criminal case.
Widow adopting son. Doctrine of ‘relation-back’ makes sonship retroactive from the moment of death of the late husband and the new entrant is deemed to have been born on the date of death of the adoptive father. Karnataka High Court.
‘Howsoever high you may be, law is above you’. Karnataka High Court rejects plea of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and others against criminal prosecution for unlawful assembly.
Adoption validly made by widow of deceased coparcener. Adopted son can claim a share in the family properties as if the joint family exits though partition had taken place after the death of the adoptive father. Karnataka High Court.
Banks cannot issue Look Out Circulars only for the purpose of loan recovery. Such an attempt violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Doctrine of blending of individual’s property into joint family can be inferred by the words and if there are no words, then from his conduct. Karnataka High Court.
Pendency of civil or criminal case cannot be a ground to refuse entry in the property registers as to the encumbrance in respect of a registered document. Karnataka High Court.
”Political parties and elected representatives deserve reasonable protection of reputation from insulting words which are a form of uncivilised violence and intimidation”. Karnataka High Court while rejecting BJP challenge to prosecution u/s 500 IPC.
Compromise decree in respect of ancestral properties among the coparceners can be passed even when the shares of the compromising parties to the suit are not defined by partition. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Disciplinary authority cannot go on holding enquiry after enquiry against an employee till the desired report is given by the enquiry officer. Karnataka High Court.
When a registered conveyance takes place, no duty is cast on the purchaser to intimate such transfer to the Revenue Authorities. Mutation entry has to take place as per Section 128(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue 1964 Act. Karnataka High Court.
Singing the National Anthem facing the National Flag in Schools and public offices is necessary to teach students and citizens patriotism and respect for the country. Karnataka High Court.
Money belonging to a citizen is his property. If that is retained by the State, that amounts to temporary acquisition of property for which compensation has to be paid going by Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Banking Regulation Act. Bank can discontinue employment of a person who is convicted for an offence involving moral turpitude, whether he is sentenced or not. Karnataka High Court.
‘’Judges cannot act like Mughals of bygone era’’. High Court cannot issue writ in derogation of law or transcend the barriers of law. Karnataka High Court.
Stay of suits under Section 10 CPC. Once the petition under Section 276 of Indian Succession Act is converted into a full-fledged civil suit, all other suits touching title to the same property shall remain stayed. Karnataka High Court.
High Court in writ jurisdiction cannot enter into the arena of interpretation of contractual term, its enforcement and the questions regarding breach or otherwise thereof since they are questions to be subjected to evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Denotification and rescinding the denotification has to be gazetted so that the stakeholders challenge it; and the unscrupulous landowners would not prey the potential buyers on the basis of Denotification. Karnataka High Court.
Minimum one kilometre distance from the notified National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuary has to be maintained in establishing, running and operating the quarry units. Karnataka High Court upholds ban on quarrying near Kappathagudda.
‘’Women are the epicenters of family life’’. Women by their very nature deserve preferential treatment inter alia in matters relating to bail, regular or anticipatory. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Value of casurina trees, eucalyptus tree and firewood trees cannot be excluded while determining the compensation payable for the land. Karnataka High Court.
In the absence of statutory mandate for issuance of final notification within the particular time, delay in issuing the final notification cannot be a ground to quash the acquisition proceeding or to declare that the acquisition has been abandoned. Karnataka High Court.
Unlike agreement of lease which transfers interest in the property; agreement to lease does not effect demise praesenti. Agreement to lease cannot be impounded on the ground of inadequate stamping. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Income Tax exemption provided under Section 96 of 2013 Act does not apply to acquisition of land under any other statutes such as the Karnataka Highways Act. Karnataka High Court.
Exemption of nursery from acquisition. ‘Make believe’ nursery without registration with Indian Horticulture Board cannot be considered for exemption. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. When a person is placed in independent charge of a post, albeit being eligible for promotion to that post, and later receives retrospective promotion, he is entitled to salary arrears corresponding to the pay scale of the said post. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. ‘’It is the prerogative of the employer to deploy his staff suitable to the requirement of work/place unless the conditions of service otherwise provide’’. Employees cannot sit in self-judgment as to the validity of transfer order and disobey the same with impunity. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. When large extent of land is acquired and gigantic financial implications are involved, hearing all the stake holders/beneficiaries regarding enhancement/reduction of compensation would infuse a sense of justice in them. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Deemed suspension of an employee would continue even after his detention comes to an end by virtue of enlargement on bail or otherwise till after the competent authority issues a formal order revoking the suspension. Karnataka High Court.
The limitation period for instituting probate proceedings for a Will is three years, as per the residuary provision of the Limitation Act, subject to specified exceptions. Karnataka High Court.
Compromise entered before the Lok Adalat. Persons unconnected to the dispute do not have the legal standing to question or overturn the compromise agreement reached through the Lok Adalat. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act, 1961. Although there is no specific time limit to initiate penalty proceedings under 271-D, such proceedings are not immune to the principles of delay and laches, and undue delay can invalidate them. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. Proceedings against the legal representatives of a deceased assessee can be continued only if the proceedings were initiated during the lifetime of the assessee and not otherwise. Karnataka High Court.
A member cannot be disqualified under Section 43-A(1)(iii) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, when reasonable cause is shown by the member for remaining absent for four consecutive meetings. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Value Added Tax Act. Concessional benefits can be availed only if the goods bought by the assessee are included in its certificate of registration and the purchases meet the test of ‘integral connection’ to the ultimate production of goods. Karnataka High Court.
SARFAESI Act. When there are multiple appeals, pre-deposit under Section 18 in one of the appeals enures to the benefit of other, provided that debt is the same. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition. The decision to notify acquisition is essentially of the Executive, be it by way of urgency or in usual course. Writ Courts cannot undertake a deeper examination of such decisions, that are made on the basis of a host of factors which by their very nature are not judicially assessable. Karnataka High Court.
A secured creditor cannot offer a property to the second-highest bidder through private negotiations if the highest bidder defaults. A fresh auction is mandatory under Rule 9(3) of SARFAESI Rules, 2002. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. A bonafide belief based on legal opinion from tax experts and legal professionals can constitute a reasonable cause under Section 273B, thereby exempting the assessee from penalty under Section 271C for non-deduction of TDS. Karnataka High Court.
Parliament can levy service tax on restaurants and accommodations under Entry 97 of List I. Service tax and sales tax target different aspects of the same transaction, allowing states to impose sales tax on food sales while the Union taxes the service component. Karnataka High Court.
Set Top Boxes qualify as ‘goods’ under the KVAT Act, and their transfer to subscribers for a fee constitutes a ‘sale’. The Karnataka GST Act, 2017, does not nullify past VAT liabilities, and retrospective taxation through government notification is legally valid. Karnataka High Court.
The 45-day limitation period under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act is mandatory and cannot be extended. The DRT lacks the power to condone delay, and courts cannot intervene to relax statutory time limits based on equitable considerations. Karnataka High Court.
A service provider is entitled to reimbursement of additional tax liability arising due to statutory changes. An arbitration clause does not bar writ jurisdiction when public law principles or contractual fairness are involved. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Candidates who join service late, even with authorized extensions, will have their seniority determined by their actual date of joining, rather than their position in the select list. However, once the seniority lists are finalized and have been in effect for a long period of time, they cannot be retroactively revised to unsettle established rights. Karnataka High Court.
When there are two agreements to sell with different price components, the court must examine the intent of the parties and the circumstances surrounding the agreements to determine the actual terms of the transaction. A mere change in price alone may not constitute novation unless the new contract completely substitutes, rescinds, or alters the original contract. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal Corporation cannot rescind a khata in its entirety when the dispute involves only portions of the land. Appellate Tribunal must tailor its orders to the scope of the dispute and the parties involved, rather than issuing blanket cancellations. Karnataka High Court.
Contract employees also have right to maternity benefits. Such right is rooted in the constitutional mandate under Article 42 and strengthened by international conventions unless the policy expressly excludes them in a manner consistent with constitutional and international obligations. Orissa High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar celebrates his 55th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar: Born on 20.07.1970. Did B.Com., LL.M. (Karnataka University, Dharwad). Enrolled as an Advocate on 24th June, 1994. Started practicing in Dharwad District Court in the chambers of his father- Mr. B.M. Amarannavar. Worked as Special Public Prosecutor, Fast Track Court, Dharwad. Worked as part-time faculty member in University College of Law, Dharwad. Directly appointed as District and Sessions Judge on 25th February 2008 and served as Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot and Udupi. Served as Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Karnataka and also served as Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Appointed as an Additional Judge of High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru on 04-05-2020 and Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Important Judgments delivered by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar.
Cr.P.C. Section 41A. When police issues notice under Section 41A, the apprehension of arrest is not completely ruled out. Hence petition for anticipatory bail is maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Service law. A public servant cannot be left without a post. Transfer of a public servant without him being posted elsewhere amounts to a legal malafide. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Suit for partition by daughters based on the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. Properties sold prior to 20 December 2004 are not available for partition. Karnataka High Court.
Plea of adverse possession in the written statement and the plea of ownership based on grant in the oral evidence run contrary to each other thus disproving both the claims. Karnataka High Court.
Proof of Will. When the attestor of a Will turns/declared hostile, other evidence showing proper execution of the Will can be relied upon. Karnataka High Court.
Principle of Feeding the Grant by Estoppel would enure to the benefit of purchasers of Inam lands upon the re-grant under the Karnataka (Religious and Charitable) Inam Abolition Act, 1955. Karnataka High Court.
Adoption of child precedes proper ceremonies being performed. Mere adoption deed without proof of required ceremonies does not prove adoption. Karnataka High Court.
In cases of cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, courts must impose a fine that is both punitive and compensatory, ensuring the complainant receives not only the cheque amount but also reasonable interest (typically 9% per annum) to account for the delay and loss incurred due to the commercial transaction and protracted litigation. Appellate courts should not reduce this fine without proper justification, especially when the trial court has already considered the statutory interest and the time consumed in the legal process. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Complaint under Section 138 before the expiry of the 15 day notice period is premature and not maintainable. However, the complainant can file a fresh complaint, and the delay in doing so can be condoned if the complaint is filed at the earliest. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. If the payee is a proprietary concern, the proprietor can file complaint while describing as a sole proprietor of proprietary concern. Karnataka High Court.
If the legal notice is not issued within 30 days from the date of receiving the dishonour intimation excluding the first day, the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Return of the cheque with endorsement ‘’Bank under liquidation as per the order of the Reserve Bank of India’’ does not attract the provisions of Section 138. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. The initiation of suo moto proceedings for resumption within five years from the date of commencement of the Act cannot be considered illegal or vitiated by delay. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. When occupancy rights are granted ‘exclusively’ to one person, other family members cannot file a suit for partition without challenging the order of the Tribunal. Karnataka High Court.
Mere utterance of the words ‘’go and die’’ does not attract Section 306 of IPC. Words uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation to commit suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Section 319 Cr.P.C. Summoned person need not be given an opportunity of being heard before being added as an accused to face the trial. Karnataka High Court.
Industrial Disputes Act. Mere non-approval of dismissal order in terms of Section 33(2)(b) does not give right to the workman to file an application for recovery of arrears of wages under Section 33C(2). Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138. When proprietary concern is the payee of the cheque, it is not necessary to make proprietor also party to the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Complainant who settles matter before the Lok Adalat can execute the settlement as a decree before a Civil Court or proceed under Section 431, Cr.P.C depending on the terms of the compromise. Karnataka High Court.
Person who is charged for an offence under Section 307 of IPC can be convicted for the offence under Sections 324 or 325 of IPC as the case may be if the ingredients of the said offence are attracted. Karnataka High Court.
Police cannot receive a report and register a case under the provision of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act. Only the Magistrate can take cognizance of the offences. Karnataka High Court.
FIRs/Investigations cannot be transferred by invoking powers under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. Only pending cases and appeals can be transferred under the Section. Karnataka High Court.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Order of granting maintenance does not amount to ‘protection order’ and violation of the same will not attract the penal provisions of Section 31. Karnataka High Court.
When a registered sale deed is sought to be avoided on the ground of fraud, simple suit for injunction without declaration is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Though criminal prosecution is permissible against defamatory statement in civil suit, if the statement is made in good faith and necessary for the disposal of the case, criminal prosecution cannot be allowed to continue. Karnataka High Court.
While granting permission to the Police to investigate non-cognizable offence, the Magistrate cannot simply issue police intimation without passing any order on the requisition. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipalities Act. When action of the Municipality is not traceable to the provisions of the Act, prior notice under Section 284(1) of the Act is not necessary to institute a civil suit. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence to constitute the offence under Section 306 IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Lender repeatedly demanding return of the borrowed loan from the borrower and uttering abusive words will not constitute abetment to commit suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Transferor cannot prejudice the rights of the transferee by subsequent dealing with the property. If there are successive transfers of the same property, the later transfer is subject to the prior transfer. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.M. Nadaf celebrates his 49th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice T. M. Nadaf: Born on 07.07.1976, Native of Shiggaon, Haveri District. Graduated in Law from Vivekananda College of Law, Rajaji Nagar Bengaluru. Enrolled as an Advocate on 11.08.2000. Appeared before Civil Courts, Magistrate Courts, Tribunals, and High Court. In 2008, he shifted his practice to the High Court of Karnataka, Bench at Dharwad, where he distinguished himself through his expertise in civil, constitutional, service, labour, and criminal law. Empanelled as an Advocate in the High Court Legal Cell from 2020 till his elevation. Appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 17.02.2025.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.M. Nadaf.
Even though the amended Section 5 of the PTCL Act removes the limitation period for initiating proceedings, the principle of laches continues to apply. Courts can deny relief in cases where there is an unreasonable delay in seeking restoration of land, especially if such delay causes prejudice to the other party. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Termination of a probationer simpliciter is valid when the order merely mentions unsatisfactory performance and does not carry stigma. Previous complaints and actions taken thereon are immaterial if the termination order does not refer to them. Karnataka High Court.
Consumer Protection Act. Complaints against banks alleging deficiency in service, particularly those arising from marital disputes or involving criminal allegations, are not suitable for adjudication through the summary procedure of consumer forums. Such complaints are liable to be dismissed, especially where the complainant had prior knowledge of the transactions in question. Karnataka High Court.
When adjudicating an industrial dispute involving contract labour, the Labour Court has the authority to examine whether the labour contract is a sham or camouflage to deny statutory benefits to the workmen, regardless of the specific terms of the reference. Karnataka High Court.
State Financial Corporations Act. Proceedings under the Act are akin to the execution proceedings and the investigation is summary in nature and not a full-fledged civil trial. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal authorities cannot issue trade licenses that violate zonal regulations governing land use. If a property is designated primarily for residential use with limited permission for commercial use, the issuance of a trade license for commercial activities exceeding the permissible limit does not legalize the unauthorized commercial use. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. A sale deed executed in respect of granted land under the Act and presented for registration prior to obtaining permission is not void ab initio if the registration is completed after obtaining valid permission. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.G.S. Kamal celebrates his 54th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. G. Shukure Kamal: Born on 30th June, 1971 at Kodlipet, Kodagu District. Did his Primary & Secondary education both at Kodlipete and Suntikoppa of Kodagu District. Completed his PUC at Govt. Senior College, Madikeri and did his BAL.,LL.B. at Vidyavardhaka Law College, Mysuru. He was enrolled as an Advocate with the Karnataka State Bar Council on 05.08.1994. He appeared before the High Court of Karnataka, City Civil and Sessions Court, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Courts, Debt Recovery Tribunals at Bengaluru, mainly in Civil, Criminal, Constitutional, Labour, Arbitration, Revenue and Wakf matters. His Lordship appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 17.03.2021 and Permanent Judge on 30.09.2022.
Important judgments delivered by Justice M.G. Shukure Kamal.
Principles of Natural Justice. In the absence of any legal right, the principles do not apply. Authority passing resolution in favour of a person without any statutory backing can withdraw it without prior notice. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act 1894. Land acquired and vested with the Government can NOT be withdrawn. Unless there is material to rebut statutory presumption, notification under Section 16(2) is evidence of taking possession. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Market value. Amount awarded under consent award in respect of similarly situated land acquired for similar purpose can be treated to be the base price. Karnataka High Court.
A representative suit cannot be permitted to the withdrawn or compromised without complying with mandatory procedure under Order 1 Rule 8 (4) of the Civil Procedure Code. Karnataka High Court.
Though a minor can be beneficiary/ recipient under a contract, he cannot be subjected to any obligation or burden of performance of any reciprocal promise. Karnataka High Court.
Action taken pursuant to and upon an insufficiently stamped document cannot be termed as illegal, null and void and nonest in the eye of law in the absence of any specific provisions thereof. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Merely because the agreement does not stipulate any time, the same cannot be expected remain unperformed for all the time to come. Karnataka High Court.
Bombay-Karnataka area. Succession among Hindus coming under the Bombay School of Inheritance. Sister was entitled for a share if the succession had opened prior to 1956. Karnataka High Court.
“Writ Petition seeking revision of voters list cannot be maintained except by the persons aggrieved.” Karnataka High Court, while dismissing the petition filed by MLA seeking rectification of voters list of his constituency.
Indian Succession Act. Succession Certificate cannot be issued in respect of immovable property in Karnataka. Authorities cannot insist on production of Succession Certificate for transfer of khata of the property bequeathed under a Will.
State or its authorities cannot levy tax on the properties belong to Union of India constructed after the commencement of the Constitution of India in view of Article 285. Karnataka High Court.
Limitation Act. When calculating the delay in filing an appeal, the time spent prosecuting a Civil Revision Petition that was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds must be excluded, as per Section 14. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. If a document is already adjudicated and the stamp duty is paid, the trial court cannot impound the same document again under Section 34 of the Act and direct payment of stamp duty and penalty for a second time. Karnataka High Court.
Upon execution of the sale deed and payment of stamp duty, the agreement to sell merges with the sale deed. No additional stamp duty is payable on the agreement unless the sale consideration differs between the two documents. Karnataka High Court.
Mere execution of lease-cum-sale deed and possession certificate without actual delivery of possession will not absolve the BDA to allot alternate site when the site itself is not handed over to the allottee. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition initiated under the 1894 Act. If compensation amounts in respect of majority of land holdings are not deposited as on the date of the commencement of the 2013 Act, the compensation is required to be determined as per the provisions of the said 2013 Act. Karnataka High Court.
BDA scheme for residential apartments. Purchaser of a residential property is liable to pay GST if booking is made prior to completion of construction. Karnataka High Court.
A court fee dispute in civil suit should be decided as a preliminary issue only if it affects the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction; otherwise, it can be considered along with other issues in the suit. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. In partition suits, if a plaintiff claims joint possession, the suit can be valued under Section 35(2). The possession of one co-owner is presumed to be possession of all unless specifically excluded. Karnataka High Court.
Allotment of compensatory sites. Once a sale deed is executed and registered, the BDA loses all rights over the property. Unilateral cancellation of the sale deed by the authority is arbitrary, illegal, and unenforceable. Karnataka High Court.
Inordinate delay in land acquisition appeals requires valid justification. Mere plea of illiteracy or ignorance is insufficient. Prior compensation awards are not binding precedents unless land similarity is proven. Compensation enhancement must be based on independent valuation evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition lapses under Section 11A of the 1894 Act if the award is not made within two years. Lapse of acquisition occurs automatically by operation of law when statutory conditions are not met. Karnataka High Court.
When delay in payment of the auction balance is caused by factors attributable to the auctioning authority such as dispute resolution, interest cannot be levied on the purchaser. Karnataka High Court.
Once a property is notified as Waqf property under the Waqf Act, the notification is binding on all parties unless challenged within the stipulated time and in the manner prescribed under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Power to appoint and remove the Mutawalli is exclusively vested with the Waqf Board under the Waqf Act. Jurisdiction of the Civil Court in this regard is ousted. Karnataka High Court.
Objection regarding jurisdiction over the subject matter can be raised even in the second appeal. Objection with respect to territorial or local jurisdiction and pecuniary jurisdiction shall be raised at the earliest stage. Karnataka High Court.
Partition. Court cannot appoint an advocate for the purpose of division of the property. Division of property can be done either by a Collector or any Gazetted subordinate of the Collector deputed by him. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Bank, to which property is mortgaged, can file Writ Petition questioning the order cancelling the gift deed in favour of the borrower, to enforce the security interest. Karnataka High Court.
“Once a Waqf is always a Waqf’’ phrase cannot be used to justify adding properties to the Waqf list that were previously excluded. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. Failure to challenge gift deeds in favour of other children does not constitute grounds for dismissing an application. Karnataka High Court.
Plea of adverse possession must be proved by independent evidence and the parties cannot depend on the documents of non-contesting parties. Karnataka High Court.
Purchaser of joint family property from one of the co-owners can assert his right under Section 44 of the Transfer of Property Act only to the extent of his vendor’s share though the entire property was sold to him. Karnataka High Court.
Respondent in an appeal can state that finding against him on a particular issue ought to have been in his favour without filing appeal or cross objection. Appellate court cannot reject the plea when cross appeal is not filed. Karnataka High Court.
Accident involving parked and moving vehicle. Foremost obligation/burden is on the owner of the vehicle which is parked on the road and prove that he had indeed complied with the requirement of Section 122 of MV Act. Karnataka High Court.
Statutory body allotting sites by merely mutating names of the allottees in the revenue records without causing execution and registration of title document will not confer any right. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Once award is passed, Land Acquisition Officer becomes functus officio and except carrying out clerical or arithmetical mistakes if any in the award, there cannot be any further re-consideration of the award. Karnataka High Court.
Khatha of property cannot be unilaterally cancelled alleging encroachment of Village Panchayat property without following the procedure under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Removal of Obstructions and Encroachment) Rules. Karnataka High Court.
Non consideration of application for production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 while disposing the appeal is a mistake and an error apparent on the face of the record providing “sufficient reason” for review. Karnataka High Court.
Post of primary school teacher is a ‘civil post’. Only the Administrative Tribunal and not the High Court has jurisdiction to deal with the issue pertaining to the selection. Karnataka High Court.
Acquisition of lands for BMRCL under the KIAD Act. Compensation is payable under the provisions of land acquisition Act, 2013 without deducting the Tax at source under the Income Tax Act. Karnataka High Court.
Writ of mandamus. To meet the ends of justice, Writ Court itself can grant relief to aggrieved persons without relegating them to the authorities. Karnataka High Court.
Societies Registration Act applies to educational institutions run by a religious mutt if the institutions are registered under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for bare injunction is not maintainable when defendant apart from denying title and possession of plaintiff sets-up title to himself. Karnataka High Court.
State or its authorities cannot levy tax on the properties belong to Union of India constructed after the commencement of the Constitution of India in view of Article 285. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. Succession Certificate cannot be issued in respect of immovable property in Karnataka. Authorities cannot insist on production of Succession Certificate for transfer of khata of the property bequeathed under a Will.
“Writ Petition seeking revision of voters list cannot be maintained except by the persons aggrieved.” Karnataka High Court, while dismissing the petition filed by MLA seeking rectification of voters list of his constituency.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur celebrates his 55th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur: Born on 21.06.1970. Enrolled as an Advocate on 30.05.1997.
Practiced in the field of Constitutional law, Labour Laws, Company Laws, Intellectual Property, Penal Laws, Banking Laws, Negotiable Instrument Laws, Property Laws, Consumer Protection Laws, Service law, House Rent Laws, Family Laws, Land Acquisition, Economic Offence Laws, Education Law before High Court of Karnataka, Punjab and Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.
Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 11.11.2019 and Permanent Judge on 08.09.2021.
Important judgments delivered by Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur.
N.I. Act. Cheque issued to managing partner of partnership firm. Complaint filed in the name of partnership firm not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Penal Code. Section 304A. There must be a direct nexus between death of a person and rash and negligent act of accused. Death due to electrocution. Criminal negligence against Section officer of the electric company not proved. Karnataka High Court.
Writ Jurisdiction. Petition under Article 226 would NOT lie for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus for tracing missing persons. Only in cases of illegal detention or custody, such writ can be issued. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Judicial review. A rule cannot be challenged on grounds of individual hardship. Courts cannot question wisdom behind policy decisions. Karnataka High Court upholds Rule increasing age limit of doctors for posts of General Duty Medical Officers. (DB)
Judicial review. Look Out Circular issued by Bank against debtor in larger public interest and economic interest of the nation cannot be the subject matter of judicial scrutiny. National interest is paramount. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
‘Perjury has become a way of life in the Law Courts.’ – Karnataka High Court while dismissing appeal arising out of a false claim under the Motor Vehicles Act with exemplary costs. (DB)
Electricity Supply. Purchaser of industry is liable to pay arrears towards electricity supply to earlier owner. However, there shall be apportionment of purchaser’s liability when only a part of industry is purchased. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Bank loans. One Time Settlement. Once the OTS payment is made by the principal borrower, the surety is also discharged. Law on One Time Settlement discussed. Karnataka High Court. (DB)
Bar under Section 132 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act does not apply to a suit where the very jurisdiction of the Land Tribunal to grant occupancy rights is questioned. Karnataka High Court.
Employees Compensation Act, 1923. Section 4A(3)(a). Interest at 12% per annum shall be awarded from the date of the accident and not after expiry of thirty days thereafter. Karnataka High Court.
RTE Act. Government has no power to conduct examinations of its own other than the regular examinations conducted by the schools. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST PTCL Act. Delay of 20 years in applying for cancellation of the sale. Such application cannot be entertained by the authorities. Karnataka High Court.
We are living in different times, of terrorism. ‘’Bail is a rule & jail is an exception’’ has spent itself when it comes to acts of terrorism. Karnataka High Court reject bail plea of accused involved in ‘K.G.Halli Riots’.
Transfer of license for distribution of essential commodities is governed by the Control Order prevalent at the time of grant of license. Restrictions imposed in the subsequent Order cannot be applied. Karnataka High Court.
Statutory authority cannot take away property of the Citizen without paying compensation. Karnataka High Court directs conveyance of the alternate property.
Fair price shop. Compassionate allotment of licence on the ground of death of authorized original dealer. Control Order of 2016 and 2021 would not be applicable for the licenses issued earlier. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Renewal of permit is a privilege and preferential right of permit holders which shall be considered within a stipulated time failing which deemed renewal kicks in. Karnataka High Court.
‘’It is the duty of the State to take care of the widows and children of ex-servicemen who served this country’’. Karnataka High Court directs proper consideration of application for grant of land by widow of soldier.
Government Advocate has only fiduciary relation with the Government and cannot claim the benefit of forcing the Government to continue his services if the Government does not wish to do so. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC. Procedure in case of assignment before final order in suit applies even to a suit for permanent injunction. Karnataka High Court.
When property is transferred by way of a registered document, Revenue authorities are duty bound to make entry in the revenue records/mutation records without application of the parties. Karnataka High Court.
Party whose presence would enable the Court to completely and effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit can be impleaded though no specific relief is sought against such party. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition Act of 2013. There is no bar for the land-loser to make an application even after the period of thirty days for reference under Section 64. Karnataka High Court.
When once the tenanted land is vested with the State Government under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, the same cannot be subsequently declared as Wakf property. Karnataka High Court.
’Direction to mutate name of Government in respect of private property, without following due process of law, is illegal’. Karnataka High Court orders restoration of the owner’s name in the revenue records.
Cr.P.C. Inherent power to recall judgment applies only in cases of lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, or denial of natural justice. Karnataka High Court.
Change of khata in respect of a purchased site cannot be refused on the ground that the original layout is unauthorised and illegal or that the site falls within the park or other civic area. Karnataka High Court.
A preliminary notification for land acquisition could be quashed if the authorities fail to proceed with the acquisition process within a reasonable time, even if the law does not prescribe a specific time limit. A reasonable period for issuing the final notification is two years. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar celebrates his 62nd birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar: Born on 16th June, 1963. Enrolled as an advocate on 11.02.1987 and practiced independently at Chikkaballapur, City Civil Court and High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore on Civil side. Directly appointed as District and Sessions Judge on 27th May, 2002 and served as Additional Districts and Sessions Judge at Tumkuru; and City Civil Court, Bangalore and Principal District and Sessions Judge at Bidar, Chitradurga, Bangalore Rural Districts. And also served as Director Karnataka Judicial Academy, Bengaluru. Appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14.11.2016 and Permanent Judge on 03.11.2018.
Important judgments delivered by Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar.
Public Trust. Decision on application under section 92 CPC shall be taken by looking into only the plaint averments. Application can be opposed only with reference to plaint averments only. Karnataka High Court.
Civil Procedure Code. Order granting leave under section 92 in respect of public trust is a judicial order and can be questioned by revision petition under section 115.
Attachment before judgment in a suit for damages for defamation cannot be passed since the claim for damages is not an ascertained sum arising from a transaction between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
Attachment before judgment. The plaintiff must be able to demonstrate that on the day when the suit was filed, the defendant owed to him in a certain sum of money on account of a transaction between them. Karnataka High Court.
Caveat cannot curtail Court’s power to pass interim orders when party approaching court makes out an extraordinary circumstance in the presence of caveator. Karnataka High Court.
Filing of Caveat cannot curtail Court’s power to pass interim orders when party approaching court makes out an extraordinary circumstance in the presence of caveator. Karnataka High Court.
Executing Court can order arrest of the judgement debtor on oral application of the decree holder, without issuing arrest notice, only if the judgement debtor is within the precincts of the Court. Karnataka High Court.
Court cannot place accused exparte in cheque bounce cases and proceed with the trial. Court must secure presence of the accused if he does not appear despite service of summons. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Case. Split multiplier. Higher multiplier for the salary component and lower multiplier for the pension component is justified when the person had no future prospect of re-employment. Karnataka High Court explains.
Dowry death. Failure to explain reasons within the knowledge of the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C, renders the defence of the accused unreliable. Karnataka High Court.
When temporary injunction sought in an appeal preferred against decree, the appellate court can look into the evidence and findings of the trial court to form an opinion regarding the nature or status of the property. Karnataka High Court.
Cheque issued towards refund of failed marriage expenses constitutes enforceable debt under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the same is not hit by Section 23 of the Contract Act. Karnataka High Court.
Default imprisonment for non-payment of fine is a penalty and not a sentence. The default sentence cannot be for a period more than one fourth of maximum imprisonment period that can be imposed as sentence. Karnataka High Court.
Cheque bounce case. Single complaint in respect of several cheques issued from Company account as well as personal account is maintainable if the transaction is same. Karnataka High Court.
Cheque bounce case. Unless accused introduces a specific defence questioning financial capacity of complainant, Court cannot go into this question on its own and give a finding. Karnataka High Court.
Every seasoned advocate trains the witnesses before they are examined in the court. Such training cannot be branded as ‘tutoring the witness’. Karnataka High Court.
SARFAESI Act. Whether action can be taken in relation to security interest created in an agricultural property can also be dealt with by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Writ petition cannot be entertained on this ground alone. Karnataka High Court.(DB)
If search and seizure effected pursuant to a FIR disclose a different distinct offence, there is no bar for registration of a second FIR even though the first FIR is quashed by the Court. Karnataka High Court.
If trial court declines to frame or reframe issue despite request made by a party during pendency of suit, the same can be agitated in appeal against the final judgment. Karnataka High Court.
Omission to put question to accused under section 313 Cr.P.C, cannot be a good ground to upset conviction unless it has resulted in miscarriage of justice or prejudiced the interest of the accused substantially. Karnataka High Court.
There is no bar for the informant police officer to undertake investigation so long as the investigation is free of bias and prejudice. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Amended Section 19 is retrospective in operation and previous sanction for prosecution of retired public servant necessary even prior to the amendment. Karnataka High Court.
Registered sale deed or release deed do not require attestation and it is not necessary to examine attesting witnesses unless the execution of the document is specifically denied by its executor. Karnataka High Court.
Election petition. Defeated candidate securing zero vote in a booth does not give rise to assumption of bogus voting. Suspicion does not take the place of evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Match fixing does not amount to cheating under Section 420 Indian Penal Code though it may indicate dishonesty, indiscipline and mental corruption of a player. Karnataka High Court.
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Obtaining false caste certificate by non SC/ST person can not be construed as an offence under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
”Article 25 of the Constitution cannot be understood as affording protection to those who indulge in conversion under the camouflage of propagation of his or her religion”. Karnataka High Court while quashing criminal proceedings against police officers.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Section 8. Non-signatory defendants cannot be exposed to arbitral proceedings especially when the cause of action against all the defendants is same and cannot be bifurcated. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. Section 14. Life interest created to wife under Will beyond her share in a notional partition is not a pre-existing right. Bequeath is only life interest. Wife will not get absolute right. Karnataka High Court.
Limitation Act. Article 65-b. Recovery of possession when mortgagee sells the property mortgaged. The Article does NOT apply when the property is sold under a statute. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of Property Act. Section 43. Feeding the grant by estoppel does NOT apply if the transferee knows that the transferor did not possess the title at the time of transfer. Karnataka High Court.
Prosecution for dishonour of cheque issued towards time barred debt is permissible when cheque was issued under a subsequent written agreement between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
Inclusion of properties already partitioned in a suit for partition amounts to vexatious and scandalous litigation. Court can order deleting the properties from the plaint under Order 6 Rule 16 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
Partition Act. Party who applies for sale of the property under Section 2 cannot opt for purchase of the share of the other parties under Section 3. Karnataka High Court.
If the plaintiff who has secured an exparte order of temporary injunction fails to comply with the requirement of Order 39 Rule 3 (a) & (b) CPC, the court is bound to vacate the injunction order. Karnataka High Court.
Land Acquisition Act. Beneficiary is not a necessary party when the landowner seeks reference to Court under section 18(1) or 18(3)(b) of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Certificate to appeal under Articles 132 and 134A of the Constitution of India cannot be sought on the grounds which were not urged in the proceeding before the High Court.
Whenever a defendant takes up a specific contention in his written statement, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to meet it by filing a rejoinder. Karnataka High Court.
Mere usage of the words ‘Khayam’ or ‘Nirantara’ in a collateral document does not make lease of immovable property a ‘permanent lease’. Karnataka High Court.
Specific performance of sale agreement cannot be refused simply because khata of the property is not transferred in the name of the owner. Karnataka High Court.
Agreement of sale in favour of mortgagee in possession. Once the suit for specific performance fails, the suit for redemption filed by the vendor ought to be decreed. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance by purchaser against seller – question of ownership over the property does not assume importance. Purchaser can purchase the property from a person with defective title at his risk. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. When vendor himself does not adhere to time limit under the agreement of sale, he cannot take the plea of time being essence of the contract. Karnataka High Court.
When the appellate Court receives additional evidence such as expert opinion which requires to be analysed by the trial Court, the matter can be remanded to the trial Court. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Suit for injunction based on possession is not barred by Section 133(1)(i) of the Act. Bar applies only to suits involving tenancy. Karnataka High Court.
Not every application under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC requires detailed enquiry. Courts must reject frivolous application at the threshold to enable the decree holder to reap the benefits of the decree. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. Failure on the part of daughters to claim share in house property in a family partition does not amount to abandonment of claim under the unamended Section 23. Karnataka High Court.
When a person who is not a party to a compromise decree seeks to avoid the decree based on his independent right or title over the property in question, he can maintain a separate suit. Karnataka High Court.
“When the murder is in broad daylight, evidence of the eyewitnesses cannot be brushed aside.” Karnataka High Court reverses acquittal of four persons and convicts them for murder.
Civil suit seeking declaration of a property as Wakf property is not maintainable. Plaint in such a suit is liable to be rejected. Karnataka High Court.
Though earlier suit for injunction does not operate as resjudicata, specific issues framed in the earlier suit and the decision rendered therein would certainly operate as resjudicata. Karnataka High Court.
Plaintiff is bound by law of limitation when he files a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule (1) CPC. If liberty is granted at the appellate stage, the cause action for fresh suit must be different than the earlier one. Karnataka High Court.
’Article 21 cannot be stretched too long to afford protection to persons who have least concern for the rule of law and pose threat to sovereignty and integrity of the nation.’ Karnataka High Court while rejecting bail plea of terror accused.
Section 33 of the Evidence Act. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated. Absolute reliance cannot be placed on the previous evidence given by such witness. Karnataka High Court.
Non-registration of sale agreement under which possession is delivered does not come in the way of grant of injunction in favour of the plaintiff if there is a threat of alienation of the property. Karnataka High Court.
Suit by minor challenging sale of property by his father/mother should be filed within three years from the date of attaining majority and not from the date of knowledge of the sale transaction. Karnataka High Court.
Application for extension of time to file chargesheet takes priority over an application for default bail when both the applications are filed on the same day. Karnataka High Court.
When a person has been in possession of immovable property for a long time with revenue entries continuously in his name, there is no impediment to declare his title though he is not in a position to produce any document of title. Karnataka High Court.
Family settlement/arrangement need not be among the joint family members having a right of succession but can include an outsider provided such a settlement/arrangement is fair and bona fide. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act. Document relating to date of birth of a student issued by School on the basis of entry of the date of birth made in the admission register can be relied for the purpose of age determination. Karnataka High Court.
“Coparcenary system continues even after the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act.” Karnataka High Court explains the principles behind succession and survivorship.
Wife and children of the plaintiff, who contested against the plaintiff in the suit, cannot come on record as his legal representatives in the suit/appeal due to conflict of interest. Karnataka High Court.
Legitimacy. A person recognized as a daughter in official records is presumed to be a biological child unless disproven by strong contrary evidence. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Limited right of widow prior to 1956 in the form of ‘life estate’ becomes absolute right after coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
Proceedings under the State Financial Corporations Act must be initiated within three years from the date of demand notice. Mere invocation of a guarantee deed does not extend the limitation period unless there is an acknowledgment of debt. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. Separate trials for distinct offenses are not inherently illegal. However, if offenses could’ve been tried jointly and separation prejudices the accused, a joint trial is warranted. The key factor is whether the separate trial compromised the accused’s rights or led to a miscarriage of justice. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of Property Act. Section 43. Feeding the grant by estoppel does NOT apply if the transferee knows that the transferor did not possess the title at the time of transfer. Karnataka High Court.
Once land is acquired and possession is taken, especially when used for public purposes, title vests with the State/Authority. Even constitutional protection under Article 300-A does not extend to claims that are stale, especially where there have been public developments, site allotments, and third-party rights. A Civil Suit filed beyond the limitation period suffers from incurable delay and is not entitled to the relief sought. Karnataka High Court.
Test. Under the UAPA, an individual is deemed a “terrorist” based on their involvement in acts defined by Section 15, regardless of scheduled status; bail under Section 43D(5) is denied if there are prima facie reasonable grounds to believe the accusations are true, without requiring a mini-trial. Karnataka High Court.
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. An individual is deemed a ‘terrorist’ based on their involvement in acts defined by Section 15, regardless of scheduled status. Bail under Section 43D(5) is denied if there are prima facie reasonable grounds to believe the accusations are true, without requiring a mini-trial. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik T celebrates his 50th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik Thavaryanaik: Born on 01.06.1975. Native of Chitradurga. Completed B.A.L., L.L.B., from SJM Law College, Chitradurga and secured 3rd Rank. Obtained L.L.M. from Kuvempu University, Shivamogga. Enrolled as Advocate and practiced at Chitradurga. Appointed as District Judge on 02.01.2012. Served as Registrar (Administration) at High Court. Worked at Prl. Secretary to Government, Law Department. Worked as Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Udupi & Bengaluru Rural District.
Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 24.01.2023.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Venkatesh Naik.
“Speedy trial in NIA cases guarantees the fundamental right under Article 21”. Karnataka High Court directs establishment of three more Special to ensure speedy trial and disposal of the NIA cases.
Karnataka High Court directs amendment of Section 377 IPC to include Necrophilia on the lines of laws prevalent in UK, Canada, NZ etc. Guidelines issued to install CCTVs in mortuaries and to maintain Mortuary hygiene.
Mere act of insulting a person would not satisfy the ingredients of Section 504, IPC. There must be intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under Section 306 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Additional accused can be added under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the conviction and sentence is pronounced as otherwise the Court gets divested of its power. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. When the defendant neither pleads nor leads evidence on hardship, Court shall decree the suit especially when the plaintiff proves readiness & willingness. Karnataka High Court.
Mere expression of words without any intention to cause alarm or cause to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do does not constitute criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Mere use of words ‘Investigating Officer is directed to conduct the investigation’ without applying the judicious mind, does not amount to permission by the Magistrate to take up the investigation for a non-cognizable offence. Karnataka High Court.
Advocates must practice Seven Lamps of Advocacy. Making false allegations against the Presiding Officer cannot be countenanced for transfer of case under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
Mere act of insulting a person would not satisfy the ingredients of Section 504, IPC. There must be intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace. Karnataka High Court.
Abetment to commit suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under Section 306 of IPC. Karnataka High Court.
Additional accused can be added under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the conviction and sentence is pronounced as otherwise the Court gets divested of its power. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Deletion of certain lands from the acquisition based on objective, rational considerations, including areas that had already been converted for non-agricultural use, extensively developed localities, nurseries, religious institutions, and lands already acquired for other Government projects etc cannot be a ground to challenge the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. Failure to include land in the preliminary notification and denial of the right to file objections vitiates the entire acquisition proceedings. Arbitrary exclusion or inclusion of lands in the acquisition process is discriminatory and unlawful. Karnataka High Court.
A General Power of Attorney duly executed and notarized carries a presumption of validity under Section 85 of the Indian Evidence Act. Mere execution of a cancellation deed and its registration under Book IV of the Registration Act does not amount to constructive notice to third parties. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. A suspension order cannot be sustained if it is based solely on a criminal case that has been quashed. Continued suspension, in the absence of periodic review is illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Judgment on admission. A suit can be dismissed on the basis of admissions if they are unequivocal and leave no further dispute regarding the material facts in the case. Admissions regarding the validity of a family settlement in a compromise petition falls within the ambit of Order XII Rule 6 CPC. Karnataka High Court.
”Even if disobedience of a court order is undisputed, the court may consider a defence of impossibility to comply and refrain from initiating contempt proceedings if enforcement is deemed impossible”. Karnataka High Court accepts substantial compliance regarding restoration of forest lands in the revenue records.
Constructive Resjudicata. To invoke Order II Rule 2 CPC and to reject the plaint, there should be intentional relinquishment of claim in the earlier suit. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai K celebrates his 51st birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai Kallangala: Born on 01.06.1974. Completed primary education at Kepu & secondary education & PUC at Vitla. Completed Degree from St. Philomina’s College. Completed LL.B., from Vivekananda Law College, Puttur. Enrolled as Advocate in 1999 and practiced in the office of Sri G. Balakrishna Shastri and Sri Younus Ali Khan. Later joined the office of Hon’ble shri Justice John Michael D’Cunha. Worked as Government Pleader for 2 years. Served as Central Government Senior Panel Counsel for 6 years. Functioned as Special Public Prosecutor for Enforcement Directorate, and Narcotics Control Bureau. Served as Panel Advocate for BDA. Practiced mainly on criminal side.
Sworn-in as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 09.02.2023.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai.
IPC. Section 306. To constitute the offence under Section 306, IPC, the accused must have played an active role by act of instigation or doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Karnataka High Court.
Application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC can be considered only at the time of hearing of appeal on merits so as to find out whether the additional evidence has any relevance/bearing on the issues involved. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal trial. Denying cross-examination violates a person’s life and liberty which are not only fundamental rights but also basic human rights. Karnataka High Court.
Service law. In the absence of clear proof based on the evidence of witnesses in the enquiry, an adverse presumption cannot be drawn on the guilt of the accused. Karnataka High Court sets aside compulsory retirement on corruption charges.
Standalone distilleries established for manufacturing ethanol are not governed by the provisions of the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966. Karnataka High Court.
”Purpose of acquisition is relevant factor in determining the compensation’’. Karnataka High Court enhances compensation from Rs. 750 to Rs. 2000 for the land acquired for Court complex.
Conviction for the offence under Section 366A Procuration of minor girl for illicit sexual intercourse must be fortified by sufficient evidence and reasons when the offence of rape not proved. Karnataka High Court.
When the prosecution fails to prove its case, benefit of the acquittal can be extended by the appellate court even to the accused who has not preferred appeal challenging the order of conviction. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. Though due to passage of time and memory loss, witnesses deviate from their Police Statements, but when such discrepancies make the foundation of the prosecution case shaky, the Court has to take strict note thereof. Karnataka High Court.
If deposition of the child witness inspires confidence in the mind of the Court and there is no improvement or tutoring, the Court may rely upon the same. Karnataka High Court.
In determining culpable homicide under Section 299 of IPC, mentality of the accused, nature of the act and its effect upon the victim have to be analysed. Karnataka High Court.
When accused are acquitted for the offences under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, conviction for the murder cannot be sustained. Karnataka High Court.
Lack of intention on the part of the accused and commission of the act in the heat of passion upon sudden quarrel are the mitigating circumstances. Karnataka High Court reduces sentence from Section 302 IPC to Section 304.
Criminal Law. When trial Court misreads the evidence and arrives at a conclusion erroneously to convict the accused, the appellate Court must intervene to prevent miscarriage of justice. Karnataka High Court.
Reference Court while awarding compensation in respect of the sub-soil/minerals underneath the soil of the acquired properties shall take into consideration the provisions of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules. Karnataka High Court.
Freedom fighters’ pension. The proof required must be as provided in the pension scheme itself. As long as such proof was not available, the benefit cannot be granted. Karnataka High Court, while following the Supreme Court Judgment.
Criminal law. To impose the extreme punishment, all the three tests; Crime test, Criminal test and Rarest rare test must be satisfied. Karnataka High Court converts imprisonment till last breath of life to life imprisonment.
Criminal Law. Subsequent voluntary statement of the accused cannot be admissible in evidence and recovery to that effect amounts to “rediscovery of a fact already disclosed and capable of discovery.” Karnataka High Court.
Cheque issued by vendor to purchaser of property as security towards pending litigation on the property is not ‘legally enforceable debt’. Karnataka High Court.
Presumption of innocence is a human right. Mere recovery of the tainted money, dehorse the circumstances under which it was found, is not sufficient for conviction under the PC Act when the substantive evidence is not proved. Karnataka High Court.
Preventive detention under the Goonda Act. Failure to furnish translated copies of the documents to the detenue renders the detention unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Contributory negligence cannot be attributed to victim riding vehicle simply because he did not have driving license and insurance, especially when he was riding on the correct side of the road. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act,1988. Tribunal or Court should not apply the split multiplier in routine course and multiplier should be applied. An injured or the legal representatives of the deceased should not be deprived from getting a just compensation. Karnataka High Court.
MVC Act. Tribble riding on a two-wheeler itself is not a ground to avoid insurance liability unless it is established that the tribble riding was the cause for the accident to attribute contributory negligence. Karnataka High Court.
Service Law. Court cannot sit on perceptivity of the State Government in posting a person to a particular post except considering the eligibility of the person to occupy the post. Karnataka High Court.
Failure to furnish legible and translated copies of the documents supporting the preventive detention to the detune vitiates the detention order. Karnataka High Court.
Income Tax Act. Proceedings regarding escaped assessment and notices under Section 153C solely based on loose sheets and documents which are termed as ‘diaries’ found during the search are unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
It is not always mandatory for the State Government to script the reasons for transfer of public servant when the reasonings are reflected in the records for obtaining prior-approval from the Chief Minister. Karnataka High Court.
A suit seeking a declaration regarding matrimonial status, whether affirmative or negative, falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Family Court under Section 7(1)(b) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The nature of relief sought does not affect maintainability, and Civil Courts are barred from entertaining such suits. Karnataka High Court.
Criminal Law. A conviction under Section 302 IPC can be upheld without an independent eyewitness if res gestae witnesses, forensic evidence, and motive prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Testimony from the deceased’s family cannot be dismissed for bias, and minor contradictions or hostile witnesses do not weaken a well-supported prosecution case. Karnataka High Court.
State Financial Corporation Act. In proceedings under Sections 31 and 32, where the enforcement of a surety’s liability is sought, the court’s investigation is primarily limited to determining the validity of the financial corporation’s claim. Karnataka High Court.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad celebrates his 59th birthday today.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harekoppa Thimmana Gowda Narendra Prasad: Born on 1st June 1966. Studied B.Sc., from D.V.S.College, Shivamoga in the year 1990 and LL.B., from Vidyavardhaka Law College, Mysuru in the year 1993.
Enrolled as an Advocate in the High Court of Karnataka in the year 1993. Started Practice in the Chambers of Prof. Ravivarma Kumar.
Initially for a period of two years practiced in Trial Courts, Bengaluru.
Practiced in the field of Constitutional Law, Service Law, administrative Law, Public Law, Property Law, Arbitration and Conciliation mattes, Environmental Law, Revenue Matters, Company matters, Banking Laws, Civil and Criminal matters before the High Court of Karnataka, Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal and Central Administrative Tribunal.
Appointed as High Court Government Pleader in the year 2006 till 2013 and as Additional Government Advocate from 2013 till the date of elevation, i.e., 2018.
Appointed as an Additional Judge, High Court of Karnataka on 02.06.2018 and as Permanent Judge on 26.02.2020.
Important Judgments delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad.
Issuance of fifteen days notice for moving no confidence motion under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules is mandatory. Karnataka High Court.
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2002. Right of appeal under Section 16 (1) is conferred on both sides and not confined only to senior citizen and parents. Karnataka High Court.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Order passed under Section 12 can be enforced in the same manner as laid down under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 147. Person travelling on mud-guard of a tractor is NOT an authorized passenger. Persons working on ploughing/crushing machines attached to tractor are NOT employees. Karnataka High Court.
Law of precedent. Observations made by the court must be read in context in which they appear to have been stated. The judgments of the courts are not to be construed as statutes. Karnataka High Court.
Tax laws. Interpretation. There is no equity about tax. No presumption as to tax. Nothing to be read in. Nothing to be implied except the actual language used. Karnataka High Court.
Technical objection which defeats justice should be discouraged. If infraction of procedural provision does not provide for any consequences such a provision has to be construed as directory and not mandatory.
“Removing minor girl from the lawful custody of parents is clear case of kidnap”. Karnataka High Court convicts the accused while confirming his acquittal for the offence under the POCSO Act.
“Interest of the child is paramount in cases under the POCSO Act and the Court cannot appreciate the evidence on sentimental values.” Karnataka High Court sets aside the acquittal of the sexual offender.
Civil suit barred by limitation touches the very jurisdiction of the court. Even a compromise decree cannot be passed by the original or appellate court in such a proceeding. Karnataka High Court.
MV Act. When the income declared by a person engaged in a profession or business is not stable, in order to assess the income, the average of the income of the years considered would be appropriate. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. Widow who is remarried after the succession opened due to the death of her husband is entitled to a share in her late husband’s properties. Karnataka High Court.
Purchaser cannot maintain a civil suit against the land acquisition body (BDA) for declaration and injunction when the acquisition proceedings are already completed. Karnataka High Court.
Civil suit for injunction against acquiring body in respect of property acquired under a statute is not maintainable and is barred under Section 9 of CPC. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka SC/ST (PTCL) Act. Even the suo motu proceedings for resumption of alienated lands can be initiated only within the reasonable time. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Panchayat Act. Adhyaksha of Zilla Panchayats can interfere with an order or resolution of the Grama Panchayat only when the Adhyaksha of the Panchayat makes a reference to him. Karnataka High Court.
Municipal Corporation cannot insist on probate of a Hindu Will for change of khata since the Will executed by Hindus are not covered by Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57 of the Indian Succession Act. Karnataka High Court.
To enforce right of pre-emption, the suit has to be filed within one year from the date of registration of the instrument. Suit for specific performance cannot be filed to avoid limitation issue. Karnataka High Court.
Court can pass an exparte order appointing a court commissioner under Order XXVI Rules 1 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Code in an intellectual property rights case. Karnataka High Court.
A dispute arising out of a Share Purchase Agreement does not amount to a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Such matters should be adjudicated by a regular civil court and not by a Commercial Court. Karnataka High Court.
Trial court has no power to determine stamp duty and penalty on insufficiently stamped documents. Such matters must be referred to the District Registrar, who alone has the power to assess and certify compliance. Karnataka High Court.
Objections regarding pecuniary jurisdiction of trial court can be raised in an appeal against an interlocutory order when the suit is still pending. Bar under Section 21 of CPC applies only to appeals against final judgment and decree. Karnataka High Court.
Daksha Legal 