Justice R Devdas celebrates his 54th birtyday today
Justice R Devdas was born on 15th May 1969. He studied in Sri Ramakrishna Vidyashala, Mysore. Pre-University Education and Bachelor of Arts at St.Joseph’s Arts and Science College, Bangalore and Bachelor of Law at Sri Jagadguru Renukacharya College of Law, Bangalore.
He started practice in the year 1994 in the office of M/s. Jayaram & Jayaram, Advocates, Bangalore.
He was appointed as Addl. Government Advocate for State of Karnataka on 6th June 2008. Appointed as Principal Government Advocate on 10th July 2014.
Justice R Devdas was appointed as an Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 14th February 2018 and was appointed as Permanent Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 7th January 2020.
Some of the latest and important judgements delivered by Justice R. Devdas.
The Representation of People Act, 1951. No person can be added as a party to election petition after expiry of 45 days period of limitation. Non-joinder of necessary party results in dismissal of election petition. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ElsrB7lQoFyqzayPeIxfXtSSf
Justice Suraj Govindaraj celebrates his 50th birthday today.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj graduated LL.B (Hons) at National Law School India University. He enrolled as an Advocate on 23.06.1995. Practiced in the field of Civil, Commercial Litigation, Contracts, Property Law, Arbitration, Company Law, Intellectual Property Rights, Constitution Matters, Debt Recovery, Environmental Law, Revenue Matters under local land laws, Consumer Law, RERA etc., Appeared before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, almost all High Courts in the Country, District Courts, Tribunals etc.,
Justice Suraj Govindaraj was appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 23.09.2019 and Permanent Judge on 01.03.2021.
He is a member of the Phase 3 committee advisory, implementation and monitoring Committee, Neutral Citation Committee and the Ai assisted translation Committee constituted by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India. He is also a member of the Computer and Technology Committee of the High Court of Karnataka, was instrumental in setting up the Telegram Channel, which is used by most of the lawyers in Karnataka, Revamping of the Website of the High Court of Karnataka to give all information in one place, publication of various reports in the telegram channel which are of assistance to all lawyers and judges, Postal integration at the High Court and District Courts – which gives the status of the service by the postal department. Advocate Registration and Dashboard to give real-time information of their cases etc etc.,
He is also a member of several other committees, including the Mediation Committee.
He is regularly invited by the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal on a regular basis to speak to Bhopal as also at the Regional Judicial Conferences. He is also invited by various colleges in and outside Bangalore to deliver lectures on various subjects.
He has a tremendous interest in sharing knowledge and encouraging lawyers more particularly young lawyers.
Some of the latest and important judgements of Justice Suraj Govindaraj.
KT & CP Act. When designation of land in the Master Plan as park is lapsed due to non-acquisition within five years, the landowner is entitled for conversion of the land as per the new classification of the land under the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/nm19csYtxwSXa1tdrxwIQh09c
Land acquisition notification after 19 December 2013, the date on which the 2013 Act was notified to come into force on 1 January 2014, could be issued only under the 2013 Act and not under the 1894 Act. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pnNSC5QZ6QfCBJSair4jKSN0j If possession of property is handed over before or subsequent to execution of document, stamp duty under Article 5(e)(i) of the Karnataka Stamp can NOT be levied. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WmYThpM28DJ8YSrSev8msoKrI Land acquisition notification after 19 December 2013, the date on which the 2013 Act was notified to come into force on 1 January 2014, could be issued only under the 2013 Act and not under the 1894 Act. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pnNSC5QZ6QfCBJSair4jKSN0j
If possession of property is handed over before or subsequent to execution of document, stamp duty under Article 5(e)(i) of the Karnataka Stamp can NOT be levied. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WmYThpM28DJ8YSrSev8msoKrI Workman cannot be dismissed without taking the approval of the Industrial Tribunal in terms of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act when proceedings are pending. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Zz0Jz9ZQI6qNhl3OOq3kQSdi4 Land acquisition. If compensation of some landowners is enhanced, other landowners under same notification are automatically entitled to enhanced Compensation. Duty of the State to notify all other landowners about the enhancement. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GNGySBcAcVVuNMZq14dtnt4GN Trust registered under the Trust Act is entitled to get liquor license under the amended Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian & Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968. Karnataka High Court disposes Writ Petition challenging non-inclusion of Trusts. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/5FZ6PKP5R9ybFsVoB5dFDMdRW
Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 & Rules 1971. Notification under Section 10(1) is not a pre-requisite for the Tribunal to decide matters relating to reinstatement or regularization of services of contract labour. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wx1jqT0RqIlc4fHRZNeCR7zrG Proceedings under Section 79(A) & (B) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act can NOT be initiated against purchaser of converted agricultural property. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/FbE5c913Jm3ll7axWRgSvVHbp Change of partners in a partnership concern holding excise license amounts to transfer of excise license. Authorities can cancel license for violation of condition against transfer of license. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/55RSxoygMeE8rPPNZk1UaV2Kb Suit for partition. Registration of a sale deed in respect of joint family property would amount to constructive notice to all members of the joint family and the period of limitation would commence from the date of such registration. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/5HpsEiKX16RiKmF5peIIqLKpk Labour Law. Dispute regarding termination can be raised before the Labour Court within whose jurisdiction the employee worked last and received the termination letter and not from the place of origin of termination letter. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fXlAzntmj1dAs5hmcc9RgdTt2 Cr.P.C. Sections 82 and 83. Even an agreement holder can challenge the attachment on the ground that he has an interest in the property provided the agreement is bonafide and not fraudulent. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Ul11rUyBi6KzLsSCGm1GVrKA0 In a suit for partition filed by woman against her father/brother based on amended Section 6 Hindu Succession Act, joint family properties given to her husband as dowry can also be included. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/yac9TIe4JwB5vLqBYkQQGcIny
Information Technology Act. An intermediary or its directors and officers are not liable for any action or inaction on part of seller making use of facilities provided by the intermediary in terms of a website or market place. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/jEvxF66Q30p05bi3KBRNLPNz5
Labour Law. When workman files statutory appeal as also claim petition under section 10(4-A)of ID Act,in the event of either one of them being disposed,the other proceeding would become infructuous and required to be dismissed as such.Karnataka High Court https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/iG2Y2hVKJQ61HLgji3JVea3yU
In a suit for partition filed by woman against her father/brother based on amended Section 6 Hindu Succession Act, joint family properties given to her husband as dowry can also be included. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/yac9TIe4JwB5vLqBYkQQGcIny
Cr.P.C. Sections 82 and 83. Even an agreement holder can challenge the attachment on the ground that he has an interest in the property provided the agreement is bonafide and not fraudulent. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/Ul11rUyBi6KzLsSCGm1GVrKA0
Suit for partition. Registration of a sale deed in respect of joint family property would amount to constructive notice to all members of the joint family and the period of limitation would commence from the date of such registration. Karnataka High Court https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/5HpsEiKX16RiKmF5peIIqLKpk
Change of partners in a partnership concern holding excise license amounts to transfer of excise license. Authorities can cancel license for violation of condition against transfer of license. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/55RSxoygMeE8rPPNZk1UaV2Kb
Labour Law. Dispute regarding termination can be raised before the Labour Court within whose jurisdiction the employee worked last and received the termination letter and not from the place of origin of termination letter. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/fXlAzntmj1dAs5hmcc9RgdTt2
Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970 & Rules 1971. Notification under Section 10(1) is not a pre-requisite for the Tribunal to decide matters relating to reinstatement or regularization of services of contract labour. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/wx1jqT0RqIlc4fHRZNeCR7zrG
Land acquisition. If compensation of some landowners is enhanced, other landowners under same notification are automatically entitled to enhanced Compensation. Duty of the State to notify all other landowners about the enhancement. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/GNGySBcAcVVuNMZq14dtnt4GN
Trust registered under the Trust Act is entitled to get liquor license under the amended Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian & Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968. Karnataka High Court disposes Writ Petition challenging non-inclusion of Trusts. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/5FZ6PKP5R9ybFsVoB5dFDMdRW
Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act. Special Officer cannot be appointed on the ground of resignation of directors without waiting for 15 days period prescribed under Section 29(B) to withdraw the resignations. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/rDzZKvBC2pSsW4n8CtsM8QB0s
Karnataka Societies Registration Act. Erstwhile office members cannot process election to the Society after the appointment of an administrator merely because the administrator has not taken charge. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/wY4lFwKBfwBQLCXexQmFQkkzk
KT & CP Act. When designation of land in the Master Plan as park is lapsed due to non-acquisition within five years, the landowner is entitled for conversion of the land as per the new classification of the land under the Master Plan. Karnataka High Court https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/nm19csYtxwSXa1tdrxwIQh09c
Arbitration and Conciliation Centre being run under the aegis of the High Court of Karnataka can appoint an Arbitrator if any of the parties individually or both the parties jointly were to approach the centre for such appointment. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/yJp8xzkv7KRvUcF4ImxebZWvr
POCSO Act. Increasing cases of minor girls above the age of 16 years having love/sexual relationship resulting in criminal prosecutions. Karnataka High Court asks Law Commission of India to rethink on the age criteria. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/ofcIm3beRTfBW25AsdHqszJBB
Income Tax Act. All the Directors of the Company cannot be automatically prosecuted for any violation of the Income Tax Act. There has to be specific allegations made against each of the Directors who is intended to be prosecuted. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/FkYliWXpOPPwh1zBmyJ5xZUbL
Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002. Investigating-arresting Officer must inform and provide copy of arrest order and grounds of arrest to the person being arrested. Mere oral information would not be sufficient. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/26EhqxuXfwUtQkvfc6sASu3Rs
Educational Institutions. Property tax exemption is available even to any land or building used for the purpose of educational institution or incidental thereto such as bank canteen and staff quarters. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/aneO4s04YSQSYpLCaq9fmllZs
Forcible, unauthorised, Illegal encroachment of private property by BDA. Karnataka High Court orders allotment of equivalent developed land to the owner. Imposes cost of 5 lakhs to be recovered from the officers at default. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/SCjleBmmnga5F5in7edNyDeqJ
Information Technology Act. An intermediary or its directors and officers are not liable for any action or inaction on part of seller making use of facilities provided by the intermediary in terms of a website or market place. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/jEvxF66Q30p05bi3KBRNLPNz5
Plaint in a suit for partition based on amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act is liable to be rejected if there is clear admission in the plaint about registered partition of ancestral properties prior to the amendment. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/AqiH79AYRqh6uAL1goeyPue3D
Labour Law. When workman files statutory appeal as also claim petition under section 10(4-A)of ID Act,in the event of either one of them being disposed,the other proceeding would become infructuous and required to be dismissed as such.Karnataka High Court https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/iG2Y2hVKJQ61HLgji3JVea3yU
In a suit for partition filed by woman against her father/brother based on amended Section 6 Hindu Succession Act, joint family properties given to her husband as dowry can also be included. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/yac9TIe4JwB5vLqBYkQQGcIny
ಹಿಂದೂ ಉತ್ತರಾಧಿಕಾರ ತಿದ್ದುಪಡಿ ಕಾಯ್ದೆಯ ಕಲಂ.6 ರ ಅನ್ವಯ, ಮಹಿಳೆಯು ತನ್ನ ತಂದೆ/ಸಹೋದರನ ವಿರುದ್ಧ, ಭಾಗಾಂಶ ಕೋರಿ ದಾಖಲಿಸಿರುವ ದಾವೆಯಲ್ಲಿ, ಆಕೆಯ ಪತಿಗೆ ವರದಕ್ಷಿಣೆಯಾಗಿ ನೀಡಿದ ಅವಿಭಕ್ತ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಆಸ್ತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಸಹ ಸೇರಿಸಬಹುದು. ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ಉಚ್ಚ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಲಯ. https://dakshalegal.com/kannada/actionRead/WbyTX1uAQbESng5xidE5t4TPA
Defendant whose written statement taken as not filed and on dismissal of his application under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can not seek permission to file written statement. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/vxsqepFIwum51fwGWMPjGzxsG
Court can record compromise among parties even after auction of subject property is completed since successful auction purchaser has no vested right till sale certificate is issued in his favour. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionRead/lyQiVzAZV3HscHkrWvRvzudyz
Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar celebrates his 52nd birthday today.
Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar was born on 13 May 1971. He completed his SSLC in the year 1987 in the Government School, Ilkal, Bagalkot District. He completed his PUC in S.V.M. College, Ilkal, Bagalkot and JSS College Dharwad. He secured his Bachelor of Science in the year 1993 from JSS College, Karnataka University, Dharwad. He graduated in law from KPES Law College, Karnataka University, Dharward and enrolled as Advocate on 25 June 1996.
After completion of law graduation, Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar joined the chambers of late Shri. M.C. Shanthana Goudar, Senior Advocate, Dharwad (father of Hon’ble Shri.Justice Mohan M. Shanthana Goudar, Judge, Supreme Court of India) as an apprentice. Later he joined the chambers of Shri. Arun L Neelopanth, Advocate, as Junior. Under their guidance he practiced both on civil, criminal and revenue sides. Under the guidance of late Shri. C.K.P. Panicker, Advocate, Dharwad, he practiced in labour law matters. Later he joined the chambers of Shri. G.H.Chabbi, Senior Advocate, Begalkote.
Later from the month of June 1998 onwards he shifted law practice to Bengaluru by joining chamber of Hon’ble Shri. Justice N.K.Patil, who later became Judge, High Court of Karnataka. He practiced before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Karnataka Administrative Tribunal and Labour Courts. He practiced on writ, civil, criminal, service, labour, tax, both on trial side and appellate side. He also practiced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru.
Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar was appointed as Additional District & Sessions Judge on 25th February 2008. He worked as;
Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mangaluru
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Yadgiri
Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Chitradurga
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Yadgiri
Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Chitradurga
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Bidar
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru
Presiding Officer, Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru
Member Secretary, Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru and
Principal District & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru
Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar was appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 04.05.2020 and Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Some of the latest and important judgments delivered by Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar.
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Adoption of a person above the age of 15 years is permissible only if there is custom or usage applicable to the parties which permits such adoption. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/r4Ye8rqTTu35PBYhxX4Uql6Z2
Education. ‘Punishment imposed on student for malpractice shall be commensurate with the gravity of the misconduct’. Karnataka High Court invokes doctrine of proportionality to reduce punishment imposed on a student. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3pSVsEwPGeDhKv88hWBjBikPL Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. Employees of statutory bodies and government companies are not ‘government servants’ though they are ‘public servants’. Government cannot entrust inquiry against them to Lokayukta under CCA Rules. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/hl3ot1zrDUBTQ5CXkEabzw2qe ‘No child is born in this world without a father and mother. A child has no role to play in his-her birth’. Karnataka High Court orders compassionate appointment to children born out of void or voidable marriage. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/IVr40pamyJwESPrk7VMyFlspl
Customs Act, 1962. Notification enhancing custom duty would NOT become enforceable if it is simply issued and sent for publication. It is enforceable only when such a notification is published and also offered for sale. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/hNYAc0ZUb74nQgoEg0Gi9GKUB
Motor Vehicles Act. Under ‘Act Policy or Statutory Policy’ occupants of the vehicle cannot be considered as third parties. Insurance company is liable for the occupants only if the policy is comprehensive. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/A88nFKNsQksn341XifDQsT9N1
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar celebrates his 53rd birthday today. Justice Krishnakumar was born on 07.05.1970. Graduated LL.B. at University Law College, Bangalore. Enrolled as an Advocate on 29.08.1992.
From 1992 he practiced as an Advocate in the High Court of Karnataka as well as Civil Courts, Criminal Courts and Tribunals.
Practiced on all types of Civil Cases, Criminal Cases, Writ Petitions/Appeals, Arbitration Cases, Company Cases, Motor Vehicle Cases, Matrimonial Cases and Consumer Disputes.
Appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka and taken oath on 23.09.2019 and Permanent Judge on 01.03.2021.
Justice Krishna Kumar’s father Shri. S. V. Raghavachar was one of the most respected lawyers in Karnataka. His hardwork and command over Civil Law was unprecedented.
Right of Persons with Disabilities Act. Visually impaired person cannot be driven to common law remedy when the offence committed against him attracts the RPD Act. Karnataka High Court.
Stay of execution pending suit between decree holder and judgement debtor. Order 21 Rule 29 CPC will not apply to suits which are instituted subsequent to institution of the execution proceedings. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/EXIWlWqAAKJokwlE9Bhr5lBqg
Order under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is invalid if the same is issued after three years of relevant assessment year and the amount escaped from tax is below Rs. 50 lakhs. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cO0QpNeE9byZt5F8t5krb5UMO Social impact assessment prior to issuance of preliminary notification under the 2013 land acquisition Act must be by mandatory publication of the notification in the official gazette. Else the acquisition proceedings becomes illegal. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/f6IOwhPKW9tKHd5AIywVCmAEj Land-owners whose lands were acquired for KIADB after 1 January 2014 are entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/UTv5BowxRs9w5OSH6sBpDSzSj
No income tax can be levied or deductible on compensation for acquiring lands under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act in view of 2013 land acquisition Act. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/L3EFVolIbR4Tnz2RcQknNpsJP Determining CET rankings of 2021-22 batch students by taking only CET marks is illegal. Karnataka High Court orders fresh ranking for admission to Engineering and Technology courses for the academic year 2022-23 by taking both PUC and CET marks. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wqu9tOn0gxlYPG5VOuYOGtAaA
“Right to nutritious food is a fundamental right of pregnant woman, lactating mothers and children’’. Karnataka High Court directs the State Govt to implement ICDS without further delay and to submit compliance report. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/J3p0whIuu3WVheIOqu5yQxJJ0
Arbitration & Conciliation Act. Even when limitation period to challenge arbitral award under Section 34 expired during closure/vacation of Courts, provisions of Section 4 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked by the applicant. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3te4iLh23TBvRhUBvByspiN8c
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum celebrates his 51st birthday today.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum was born on 05.05.1972 to Shri Shankar Baburao Magadum and Smt. Pushpa Shankar at Chikodi, Belgaum District. His great grandfather Shri Ishwar Magadum was the first Chief Engineer of Bombay/Karnataka State during whose regime supply of Cauvery water to Bengaluru City was started. His father Shri Shankar Magadum having a strong background in the field of Education is the founder of Gnyan Sadhana Education Society, Chikodi.
Justice Sachin S Magadum completed Matriculation in G.S.E.S. English Medium School, Chikodi and Pre-University education and Degree from Basavaprabhu Kore College, Chikodi and Graduated LL.B. at R.L. Law College, Belagavi.
Justice Sachin S Magadum enrolled as an Advocate on 31.10.1998 and practised at Chikodi from 1998 to 2001. He started his career by joining the chambers of Shri O P Burji at Chikodi.
From 03/07/2001 to June 2008 he practised at the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, in the field of Civil, Criminal and Constitutional Matters. He appeared before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, and other tribunals. While practising in Bangalore, he initially joined the chambers of Shri Vigneswar Shastry and later practised independently. After the establishment of the Circuit Bench at Dharwad he shifted practice to the High Court of Karnataka, Bench at Dharwad and stood as Standing Counsel for the National Highways Authority of India and Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubbali.
Justice Sachin S Magadum then got appointed as Additional Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on 23.09.2019 and became Permanent Judge on 01.03.2021.
Justice Sachin S Magadum is a great sportsperson. He has excellent skill in cricket, lawn tennis and table tennis.
Some of the important judgments delivered by Justice Sachin S Magadum.
Karnataka Police Act. Failure to provide reasonable opportunity to the person sought to be removed from the local limits of his jurisdiction renders the order illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act. Failure to implement the scheme substantially within five years and shifting of the scheme to other land results in lapsing of the acquisition proceedings. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Hb5AwXnGI91P2CM0SLMFoJEcp
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. In an appeal under Section 5A of the Act by the grantee, Deputy Commissioner can NOT stay mutation entry in the name of subsequent purchaser. Remedy is only under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Karnataka High Court.
C.P.C. Execution. Person who claims under a Will and seeks declaration of title and possession can NOT maintain application under Order 21 Rule 97 as obstructer. He has to file separate suit for declaration and possession. Karnataka High Court.
Where property is sold under the Partition Act 1893, provisions of Order 21 Rules 84 & 85 CPC regarding mandatory deposit of entire balance sale price within 15 days do not apply. Court can extend time for such payment. Karnataka High Court.
When a cross objection is not maintainable independently, then there is no question of maintaining two separate order sheets as per Rule 155 of the Civil Rules of Practice. Karnataka High Court.
In a suit for partition, defendant can seek direction to plaintiff to include certain properties in the plaint schedule and seek partition of the same. Karnataka High Court.
Non-binding arbitration agreement with an option to litigate further if the parties do not resolve the disputes pursuant to such non-binding arbitration cannot be termed an arbitration agreement. Karnataka High Court.
SARFAESI Act. Even person other than principal borrower, like tenant, can challenge the order passed under Section 14 only before the competent Tribunal. Writ petition is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/wvlbkDcWQyw7x6uZyCECmWLXs
Privatisation of Airports. Policy decision of the executive are best left to it and a Court should not interfere with the policy decision unless the decision of the authority is mala fide, arbitrary, irrational or unreasonable. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/zEbsCgl9aoHhnNfo9RNKj6dQC
Karnataka SC-ST (PTCL) Act, 1978. If the grantee converts the granted land for non agricultural purposes, it is no more a ‘granted land under the Act’ and hence prior permission to sell is NOT necessary. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6RtC2rw9UbeawCXsJfwnGZFcu
Karnataka SC-ST (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 is NOT applicable if the granted land is converted by the grantee to non-agricultural purposes under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NMiN2CZSZ8JdZCAd2i2uxenk9
Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act 1978. ‘Granted land’ (original grant to SC-ST persons) includes house sites or non-agricultural land also. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/3BcHZkmwX69KaHWO4KiWoYnQq
Land acquisition for Urban Development Authorities. Prolonged delay in issuing final notification after preliminary notification amounts to abandonment of acquisition. Landowner can utilize the lands in accordance with law. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Rur2eEXZMG7yKzmsosROngM24
Evidence Act and Karnataka Stamp Act. Even a photocopy-xerox copy of the original document can be impounded and deficit stamp duty can be collected by the Court if the same is produced after laying proper foundation. Karnataka High Court. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/6lstfgUodgBAVzDmHaQsFsrxN
Mareva Injunction. Court can grant mareva injunction where recovery of amounts outstanding is a long drawn process and transfer of assets by defendant defeats the claim of the plaintiff. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kNN4tUaMUDx1bDzYZy8rYFrmC
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Award rejecting claim if found to be illegal fresh award cannot be made by Court under Section 34. Only option is to set aside award and leave parties to resume Arbitration once again. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qUFbIxtepWCxHWeCMg61OZwwx
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Application under Section 9 is maintainable even after conclusion of arbitral proceedings and during Section 34 proceedings only in so far as the claim granted by the arbitrator. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OAEKztRfhK7ZhoijVje4Lduvh
CPC. Attachment before judgment is a drastic power which should NOT be exercised mechanically to convert unsecured debt into a secured debt. Prima facie case and the chance of suit being decreed are relevant. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VVRqjCkCocseG0gLmnDiGaC5w
Hindu Succession Act. Amended Section 6. Plea of prior partition. Mere partition decree will not sever joint family status. Until final decree is passed and allottees of shares are put in possession – there is no partition. Karnataka High Court. DB https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/cVSv4aF0KiIjrAxeB849GREtT Contempt of Courts Act. High Court has no power to take cognizance of contempt of Appellate Tribunal since the Tribunal is not court subordinate to High Court. Karnataka High Court. (DB) https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4IrxfFssRPHNrHC094siXPldn
Specific Relief Act. Bar under Section 22 against grant prayer not sought for does not curtail power of the appellate Order XLI Rule 33 CPC. Court can refund of sale consideration even in the absence of prayer. Karnataka High Court. DB https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KOcjJTBvmF5QZZ8EhyMj545yC
Justice Gurusiddaiah Basavaraja celebrates his 58th birthday today. He was born on 03.05.1965 at Chitradurga.
He did his early education in Government Higher Primary School, Metikurike Village. He studied SSLC from Government High School, Gannayakanahalli, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District; PUC from Government Pre-University Junior College, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District, Graduated from Vanivilasa First Grade College, Hiriyur Taluk, Chitradurga District.
He obtained LLB degree from Saraswathi Law College, Chitradurga. Obtained Masters in Law from Kuvempu University, Shivamogga.
Justice G. Basavaraja enrolled as an Advocate on 05:10:1988; practiced Civil, Criminal, Revenue, MVC, and LAC cases under Senior Counsel Shri C. Abdul Raheem, Sessions Advocate at Chitradurga. He joined Judicial Service on 18.10.1993 and worked as:
(1) JMFC at Mysuru from 1993 -1998; (2) Civil judge and JMFC at Yellapura from 1998 2001; (3) Civil Judge and JMFC at Chennagiri from 2001-2002. (4) Promoted as Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Bagalkot from 05.10.2002 to 27.05.2004; (5) 16th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru from 28.05.2004 to 23.05.2007; (6) Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM at Ranebennur from 2007 to June 2009; (7) Promoted as Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Belagavi from 02.07.2009 to 31.05.2013; (8) Special District & Sessions Judge, CBI Court and Parappan Agrahara, Bengaluru and also Concurrent Charge of Land Acquisition Cases and Special Magistrate of Bomb Blast Danduplaya and SC-ST Atrocities Cases at Bengaluru from 1-6-2013 to May 2017; (9) VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Hunusur, Mysore District Judge Hunusur, Mysore District from 31.05.2017 to 09.06.2017; (10) I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mysore from 11.06.2017 to 10.02.2018 (11) Principal District & Sessions Judge Chamarajanagar from 12.02.2018 to 06.11.2019 (12) Member Secretary, Karnataka State Legal Services Authority at Benglaluru from 11.11.2019 to 11.05.2020 (13) Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru from 11.05.2020 till 15.08.2022.
Department of Kannada and Culture has honoured Justice Basavaraja in the year 2008 for disposal of several cases in Mega Lok Adalath.
As a Chairman of District Legal Services Authority he disposed many cases under Victim Compensation Scheme. He conducted several legal literacy programs in various places.
Justice G. Basavaraja was elevated as an Additional Judge in High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru on 16.08.2022.
Some of the important Judgments delivered by Justice Gurusiddaiah Basavaraja:
Justice M I Arun celebrates his 53rd birthday today.
Justice M.I. Arun was born on 24.04.1970 at Mysore. His father Shri. M. J. Indrakumar served as Registrar, Karnataka Lokayukta till his retirement in the year 1999.
Justice M.I.Arun did his early education in Dharwad, Arasikere, Bhardravathi, Bangalore and Mysroe. He studied SSLC from MES High School, Jayanagar, Bengaluru; PUC from Mari Mallappa Junior College, Mysore; Graduated from the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru in the year 1993.
Justice M.I. Arun enrolled as an Advocate on 09.06.1993; practiced under Shri A.N. Jayaram, Former Advocate General of Karnataka and Shri B.N. Dayanand. He started independent practice as an Advocate from the year 1996 and represented several Universities and various State Government Undertakings. He was a Central Government Senior Panel Counsel and also Additional Government Advocate for a brief period.
Justice M.I. Arun was elevated as an Additional Judge in High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru on 07.01.2020 and assumed charge as a Permanent Judge on 25.09.2021.
Some of the important judgments delivered by Justice M.I. Arun
3. Suit cannot be dismissed simply because Specified Value as contemplated under the Commercial Courts Act is not mentioned in the plaint. Court can order valuation and return the plaint if the valuation is more than Rs. three lakhs. https://dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/oSCA1wLEvaz5Wv5tmTpKvSP7v
8. Evidence of hostile witness — Entire evidence of a hostile witness cannot be rejected ipso facto — Unreliable testimony may be rejected, reliable testimony may be accepted — 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3309 : ILR 2020 Kar 2586 : (2020) 210 AIC 638 : (2020) 5 Kant LJ 360 (DB) : (2020) 3 AIR Kant R 244 : (2020) 5 KCCR 588
9. Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 (Karnataka Act No. 23 of 1994 w.e.f. 30.07.1994) — Section 6-a — Equal rights to daughter in co-parccnarv property — Partition took place by virtue of two partition deeds dated 06.02.2003 — Sale took place on 22.11.2004 — By virtue of Section 6(5) of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, maintainability of suit filed by a daughter seeking rights in the co-parcenary property. Discussed. 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3385 : ILR 2021 Kar 613
Held: (a) In the instant case, the partitions took place by virtue of two partition deeds dated 06.02.2003. The sale took place on 22.11.2004. If respondent No. 1 had no right over the properties in question by virtue of Karnataka Amendment which came into effect on 30.07.1994, then, on the ground that partition and sale took place prior to 09.09.2005, she would not get any right over the properties. But, if she had a right over the properties due to Karnataka Amendment which introduced Section 6-A to Hindu Succession Act, which was in force till it was eclipsed by the Central Amendment, in that event, she can maintain a suit for partition.
(b) The decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to by the petitioners considered those transactions in which the daughters had no right over the property prior to the amendment made by the Parliament came into force. By virtue of the said decisions, the daughters cannot prefer a suit for partition, in the event if they had no right over the property prior to the amendment coming into force and the property was alienated prior to amendment coming into force. The above decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court do not bar the daughters from instituting a suit for partition, if as per prevailing law, prior to amendment she had a right over the property.
10. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Earned leave — Earned leave is not a consequential benefit — If a workman does not work, he is not entitled to Earned Leave — Earned leave is not a consequential benefit and workman has to render active service and thereby earn privilege leave to his credit — Earned leave cannot have been earned as a matter of right, but by actual working Earned leave unless the relevant regulations expressly specifies otherwise cannot be considered as part of consequential benefits.–Earned leave is a privilege, a workman would be entitled to only by actual working and it cannot be earned as a matter of right even if he did not work. Even if he were to be in employment, he becomes entitled to it only if he works and earns it, otherwise not. It is similar to night shift or traveling allowance which accrue only if the person decides to work. If he does not work, in that event, he is not entitled to it. VIjaya Bank v. H.C. Jayaprakash, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 642 : ILR 2020 Kar 1783 : (2020) 2 KCCR 1087 : 2020 LLR 414 : (2020) 2 CLR 135 : (2020) 3 Kant LJ 636 : (2020) 3 AIR Kant R 743
Justice Padmaraj Nemachandra Desai retires on 21 May 2023 during the summer vacation. He is being given hearty farewell today.
Justice P.N. Desai was born on 21:5:1961 at Navalgund, Dharwad District. He did Bachelor of Science (B.sc) Degree from P.C. Jabin Science College, Hubli and LL.B. (Spl) from University College of Law, Dharwad.
Justice P.N. Desai enrolled as an Advocate in the year 1984 and joined the Chambers of his father – Late Sri. N.J.Desai, Advocate. He practiced both on Civil and Criminal Side at Navalgund and Dharwad District Courts.
He Joined Judiciary on 25:7:1992 as a Munsiff & JMFC (Presently Civil Judge) and stood first in the merit list of the batch. He worked as Munsiff and JMFC at Turuvekere Taluk, Tumkur District and Sedam Taluk, Kalaburagi District.
He was promoted as Senior Civil Judge in the year 2002. He worked as an Assistant Draftsmen & Ex-officio Deputy Secretary to Government of Karnataka, Department of Parliamentary Affairs and Legislation, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru.
He served as Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) at Hassan and Registrar, City Civil Court, Bengaluru. In the year 2009, through a limited Departmental competitive examination conducted by the High Court of Karnataka, he was promoted as District Judge and worked as Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, Presiding Officer of Additional Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru, Judge, Family Court, Mangaluru and Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mangaluru.
He worked as an Assistant Director, Deputy Director and a Senior faculty member at Karnataka Judicial Academy, Bengaluru. He is a trained mediator from Bengaluru Mediation Centre, Bengaluru. He served in the High Court of Karnataka as Secretary to Hon’ble The Chief Justice, Additional Registrar General at High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench, Registrar (Judicial) and Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru.
Justice P.N. Desai worked as Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru District and Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru.
Justice P.N. Desai was appointed as an Additional Judge, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru on 04:05:2020 and as permanent Judge on 25:09:2021.
Justice P N Desai retires on 21 May 2023 after serving the institution of judiciary for more than 30 years. Many junior and senior lawyers have expressed heartfelt appreciation for his service and his lawyer friendly nature throughout.
“When he was posted in Turuvekere, he had to get the judgments from his senior’s office via fax. He would wait in the nearby telephone booth till late night. He would deliver the judgements taking note of the correct legal position. He recollected with ease the names of the lawyers who appeared before him 30 years ago.” recollects Mr. M N Mdusudan, Member, Karnataka State Bar Council.
“Justice P N Desai’s dedication to the law has been an inspiration to me and so many others, and his warmth and kindness have made the courtroom a better place for all who enter it” says junior advocate Mr. A. R. Goutham.
“Justice P N Desai’s fairness, intelligence, and compassion have made a lasting impact on the legal profession, and his legacy will be felt for years to come. I have learned so much from his lordship and I am grateful for the wisdom and compassion” – Advocate Yashas.
“As you move on to the next chapter of your life, please know that you will be deeply missed. You have touched the lives of so many people, and I know that your contributions to the legal community will never be forgotten.” Mr. S.P. Shankar, Senior Advocate
Some of the latest/important judgments delivered by Justice P N Desai.
Recently the Chief Justice of India asked a pertinent question “Why there are less women in Higher Judiciary?”
I wrote this on 8 March 2016. Unfortunately there is little improvement since then.
Another Women’s’ Day is here.
From the legal perspective, it is highly disappointing.
The woman lawyers are completely ignored in the matter of elevation as High Court judges or other Constitutional offices. We’ve never heard of a single woman Advocate General in the country (correct me if I am wrong).
Even the on-going selection of High Court Judges in the Karnataka High Court does not have a single women candidate.
Many woman lawyers, whose consent was obtained, felt it embarrassing to meet the collegium judges to pursue their appointment.
A woman lawyer, whose name was recommended, told me how embarrassing it was to meet the Judges in their chambers or at home to know about the status or to pursue the elevation. She was asked to meet the collegium judges of the Supreme Court and she simply did not want to do this.
Flip side of the coin is, even the Hon’ble Judges are stuck in a catch 22 situation. If a particular judge takes extra-interest to suggest, recommend or push through the name of a woman lawyer, it would be looked with suspicion.
The resultant position is, the women lawyers are deprived of the high constitutional positions.
Moreover, out of more than 100 Senior Advocates in the Karnataka High Court, there few woman Senior Advocates.
The procedure provides for inviting the lawyers to be designated as the senior advocates. It is surprising to know that not a single woman lawyer has ever been invited by the High Court to be designated in last several years.
Many women lawyers say they have to run to the chambers of judges to get recognised. No self-respecting women would do it.
However, unfortunately this is not done in any High Courts.
The woman judges should take up their cause. They should recognise the young talented woman lawyers and promote them for high Constitutional offices.
Daksha Legal 