Midas Hygiene Industries (P) Ltd. v. Sudhir Bhatia, (2004) 3 SCC 90 Full Judgment: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIABEFORE S.N. VARIAVA AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.)MIDAS HYGIENE INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. AND ANOTHER- Appellants;VersusSUDHIR BHATIA AND OTHERS – Respondents.Civil Appeal No. 107 of 2002, decided on January 22, 2004 This appeal is against the judgment of …
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Service Law. A Government Corporation cannot entrust departmental enquiry to Lokayukta unless it adopts Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. Karnataka High Court.
G.B.Devaraj and others vs State of Karnataka and others. Writ Petition 8374/2019 decided on 11 December 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/356867/1/WP8374-19-11-12-2020.pdf Relevant paragraphs: 16. The Conduct Rules of the State defines and regulates the conduct of a Government servant which is hedged by certain conditions with regard to conduct or otherwise and what would amount to …
Easements Act, 1882. Easement of necessity in relation to a pathway. It should be an absolute necessity. If there exits any other way, there can be no easement of necessity. Supreme Court.
Sree Swayam Prakash Ashramam vs G. Anandavally Amma. Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2010, decided on January 5, 2010. Reported in (2010) 2 SCC 689. Full Judgment in PDF form. See paragraph 33. Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal. Photo courtesy LiveLaw.
Transfer of Property Act. A gift of immovable property can be effected without transfer of possession. Supreme Court.
S. Sarojini Amma vs Velayudhan Pillai Sreekumar Civil Appeal No. 10785 of 2018†, decided on October 26, 2018. see (2019) 11 SCC 391 See paragraphs: 13, 16 and 17 Full Judgement in PDF format
Hindu Law. A Coparcener can sell his undivided interest. However, the purchaser cannot get possession except by way of a suit for partition. Supreme Court.
Hardeo Rai vs Sakuntala Devi Respondent. Civil Appeal No. 3040 of 2008 decided on April 29, 2008. (2008) 7 SCC 46. See paragraphs 22 to 26 Full Judgment in PDF format. Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal. Picture courtesy, LiveLaw
Hindu Law. A coparcener cannot gift his undivided share in coparcenery property without the consent of other coparceners. Supreme Court.
Thamma Venkata Subbamma vs Thamma Rattamma . Civil Appeal No. 258 of 1974, decided on May 6, 1987. (1987) 3 SCC 294. See paragraphs 8 to 18 Full Judgment in PDF format.
Can a lawyer appear on behalf of his parents, brothers, sisters or close relatives?
The answer is yes. However this comes with a condition which is found in the Rule framed by the Bar Council of India. The same reads thus SECTION II – DUTY TO THE CLIENT 13. An Advocate should not accept a brief or appear in a case in which he has reason to believe that he …
Constitution of India. After 1993 amendments, elections to local bodies can be questioned only by way of election petition. Writ petitions are not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
Geetha vs The Returning Officer. Writ Petition 15005/2020 decided on 17 December 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/357013/1/WP15005-20-17-12-2020.pdf Full Judgment: The grievance of the petitioner is that her nomination for the election to the Guddekoppa Gram Panchayat, Thirthahalli Taluk, has been rejected by the Returning Officer by order dated 13.12.2020 at Annexure-A. This writ petition is filed …
Contract Act. Fraud on third parties committed by employees during the course of their action and while working on behalf of the employer. Employer is liable for such actions. Karnataka High Court.
Electronic Research Private Ltd vs Canara Bank and others. Regular First Appeal 253/2000 decided on 22 December 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/357268/1/RFA253-00-22-12-2020.pdf Held: Para 74. Section 238 of the Indian Contract Act, contemplates that if any misrepresentation is made or fraud committed by agents, acting in the course of their business for their principal, have the …
Criminal Trial. Closing defence of accused when counsel remains absent violates Articles 21 of the Constitution of India. Court must ensure alternate legal assistance to accused. Karnataka High Court.
GOVINDARAJU @ KUTTI vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1459/2019. Decided on 23 DECEMBER, 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/357186/1/CRLA1459-19-23-12-2020.pdf Para 22. We have come across several cases, wherein the trial Courts during trial when the accused counsel was absent, closes the cross-examination of the defence as nil and proceed to pass the judgment of conviction …
Daksha Legal 