A title derived from a validly registered General Power of Attorney and subsequent sale deed, which are chronologically prior to an opponent's claim based on a later, unregistered GPA executed by the original owner, who no longer held title, constitutes a superior claim. Karnataka High Court.
A title derived from a validly registered General Power of Attorney and subsequent sale deed, which are chronologically prior to an opponent's claim based on a later, unregistered GPA executed by the original owner, who no longer held title, constitutes a superior claim. Karnataka High Court.
  • 07-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Suit for partition. Joint family property inadvertently omitted from the plaint and the consequent preliminary decree can be included during the final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for partition. Joint family property inadvertently omitted from the plaint and the consequent preliminary decree can be included during the final decree proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Pre-emptive suit by testator for avoiding disputes regarding execution and proof of Will.
Pre-emptive suit by testator for avoiding disputes regarding execution and proof of Will.
  • 21-September-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Article
News
Indian Succession Act. A person who claims a right to the testator's property adverse to the testator's title and who is not an heir under succession or inheritance, does not have a ‘caveatable interest’ and cannot be impleaded as an objector in a petition for the grant of probate. Karnataka High Court.
Indian Succession Act. A person who claims a right to the testator's property adverse to the testator's title and who is not an heir under succession or inheritance, does not have a ‘caveatable interest’ and cannot be impleaded as an objector in a petition for the grant of probate. Karnataka High Court.
  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Where a contract allows one party to unilaterally terminate it under specified conditions, and such termination is exercised, a suit for specific performance without seeking a declaration that the termination is invalid is not maintainable. Supreme Court.
Where a contract allows one party to unilaterally terminate it under specified conditions, and such termination is exercised, a suit for specific performance without seeking a declaration that the termination is invalid is not maintainable. Supreme Court.
  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Transfer of property under an unregistered General Power of Attorney is void in law. The possession delivered under such a document cannot override the lawful ownership of the true owner. Karnataka High Court.
Transfer of property under an unregistered General Power of Attorney is void in law. The possession delivered under such a document cannot override the lawful ownership of the true owner. Karnataka High Court.
  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order VII Rule 11 CPC. A plaint is liable to rejection when the suit is ex facie barred by limitation and the plaintiff fails to disclose a definite right or clear cause of action owing to vague, inconsistent, and contradictory pleadings or documents concerning the alleged title or relationship with the property. The ancillary relief of partition, being contingent upon the time-barred relief of declaration, is equally unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
Order VII Rule 11 CPC. A plaint is liable to rejection when the suit is ex facie barred by limitation and the plaintiff fails to disclose a definite right or clear cause of action owing to vague, inconsistent, and contradictory pleadings or documents concerning the alleged title or relationship with the property. The ancillary relief of partition, being contingent upon the time-barred relief of declaration, is equally unsustainable. Karnataka High Court.
  • 06-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Land Reforms Act. Grant of occupancy rights to one member of a joint family enures to the benefit of the entire joint family and is subject to partition, provided the land was cultivated by the family's ancestors and the application was filed by that member on behalf of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.
Land Reforms Act. Grant of occupancy rights to one member of a joint family enures to the benefit of the entire joint family and is subject to partition, provided the land was cultivated by the family's ancestors and the application was filed by that member on behalf of the joint family. Karnataka High Court.
  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. Order of the Adjudicating Officer or the Appellate Tribunal is not a ‘decree’ within the meaning of Section 2(2) CPC. Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain execution proceedings in respect of such orders. Karnataka High Court.
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. Order of the Adjudicating Officer or the Appellate Tribunal is not a ‘decree’ within the meaning of Section 2(2) CPC. Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain execution proceedings in respect of such orders. Karnataka High Court.
  • 05-November-2025
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement

Become A Member Get Instant Update

Daksha Legal Seminars

Daksha Legal Seminar on Model Tenancy Act

  • 03-October-2021 22:43

Panchanama - Evidentiary Value: Justice John Michael Cunha, Former Judge Karnataka High Court

  • 15-July-2021 03:42

Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code

  • 15-July-2021 03:40

Judgment on Basic Structure doctrine- Kenya High Court

  • 15-July-2021 03:37

Trial of Suits for Declaration of Title, Injunction and Possession. S.R.Somashekar, Principal District Judge (Rtd)

  • 30-May-2021 17:55

Trial of Partition Suits :Procedural Law (Part-I) Shri. S.R. Somashekara, Principal District Judge (Rtd) 28 May 2021

  • 30-May-2021 04:27

Discussion on Junior Advocates and guidance by Seniors.

  • 09-December-2020 06:19

Bail & Anticipatory Bail - M.S. Shyamsunder, Advocate, Bangalore

  • 09-December-2020 06:20

Woman as Coparcener. Legal Implications - Justice N Kumar

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Anup Shah

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Instruments Not Duly Stamped - Justice A N Venugopalagowda

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Withdrawal and Adjustment of Suits - Justice A N Venugopalagowda

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Judicial Review jurisdiction Prayers and Reliefs Mr Mohan V Katarki Senior Advocate Supreme Court

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Rejection of Plaint Justice A N Venugopalagowda 16 Sept 2020

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Driving License and Defence to Insurer - Mr S P Shankar Senior Advocate

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Termination of Contract & Drafting Termination Clause & Termination Notice - Ajay Nandalike. Adv.

  • 09-December-2020 06:18

Daksha Legal Seminar Justice Ashok B Hinchigeri. "Civil Procedure Code. Order 26 Rule 9"

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Daksha Legal Online seminar on disability laws with Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate, Bangalore.

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Article 370 - Bridge or Barricade? Seminar conducted by Daksha Legal - Mr. J Sai Deepak, Advocate

  • 25-November-2020 06:12

Daksha Legal discussion on Latest Judgement of Karnataka High Court on Hindu Law.

  • 25-November-2020 06:11
'Supreme Court curtailing the inherent powers of the High Courts. Neither Legal nor Justified'. - B.V.Acharya, former Advocate General for Karnataka.
'Supreme Court curtailing the inherent powers of the High Courts. Neither Legal nor Justified'. - B.V.Acharya, former Advocate General for Karnataka.
  • 07-November-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Tender. When the intending party responds to the tender notice, it is not permissible for such party to put forth its own conditions and seek variance in the conditions of tender. Karnataka High Court.
Tender. When the intending party responds to the tender notice, it is not permissible for such party to put forth its own conditions and seek variance in the conditions of tender. Karnataka High Court.
  • 08-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Suit for specific performance. Purchaser of suit property from the defendant/vendor is a necessary party to the suit and can be impleaded. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Purchaser of suit property from the defendant/vendor is a necessary party to the suit and can be impleaded. Karnataka High Court.
  • 03-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Suit for specific performance. Plaintiff can seek amendment of pleading to declare that collusive decree between his vendor and third party is not binding on him. Court must prevent multiplicity of the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
Suit for specific performance. Plaintiff can seek amendment of pleading to declare that collusive decree between his vendor and third party is not binding on him. Court must prevent multiplicity of the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
  • 01-October-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Tender. Courts cannot interfere with the terms of the tender because it feels that some other terms would have been fair, wiser or logical. Karnataka High Court.
Tender. Courts cannot interfere with the terms of the tender because it feels that some other terms would have been fair, wiser or logical. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-September-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article
Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued towards refund of advance sale consideration upon the failure to execute the sale deed, attracts the provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued towards refund of advance sale consideration upon the failure to execute the sale deed, attracts the provisions of the Act. Karnataka High Court.
  • 28-September-2024
  • Daksha Legal
Article