Statutory authority like BDA has no power to unilaterally cancel or ignore a registered sale deed executed by it, even on the grounds that the allotment was made in violation of its Rules. To cancel a registered instrument, the BDA must initiate appropriate proceedings before a competent Civil Court under the Specific Relief Act, rather than issuing administrative endorsements to dispossess long-standing owners. Karnataka High Court.
Statutory authority like BDA has no power to unilaterally cancel or ignore a registered sale deed executed by it, even on the grounds that the allotment was made in violation of its Rules. To cancel a registered instrument, the BDA must initiate appropriate proceedings before a competent Civil Court under the Specific Relief Act, rather than issuing administrative endorsements to dispossess long-standing owners. Karnataka High Court.
  • 20-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
The amendments to the CPC brought about by the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act empower the Court to decree or dismiss a suit where it is demonstrated that the plaintiff has no real prospect of success, or that the defendant has no real prospect of effectively defending the claim. In such circumstances, recourse to rejection of the plaint cannot be resorted to. Karnataka High Court.
The amendments to the CPC brought about by the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act empower the Court to decree or dismiss a suit where it is demonstrated that the plaintiff has no real prospect of success, or that the defendant has no real prospect of effectively defending the claim. In such circumstances, recourse to rejection of the plaint cannot be resorted to. Karnataka High Court.
  • 20-February-2026
  • 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
Karnataka Municipalities Act. An elected Councillor can be removed for 'disgraceful conduct' if they engage in actions that obstruct the statutory duties of the Council or the democratic rights of other members. Removal of such Councillor can be sustained based on proved misconduct even in the absence of a criminal conviction. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Municipalities Act. An elected Councillor can be removed for 'disgraceful conduct' if they engage in actions that obstruct the statutory duties of the Council or the democratic rights of other members. Removal of such Councillor can be sustained based on proved misconduct even in the absence of a criminal conviction. Karnataka High Court.
  • 20-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Representation of the People Act. The non-disclosure of substantial immovable assets in the affidavit constitutes a 'material non-compliance'. Since the right to know the financial antecedents of a candidate is a fundamental right of the voters, any significant suppression of wealth or property ownership vitiates the election process. Karnataka High Court.
Representation of the People Act. The non-disclosure of substantial immovable assets in the affidavit constitutes a 'material non-compliance'. Since the right to know the financial antecedents of a candidate is a fundamental right of the voters, any significant suppression of wealth or property ownership vitiates the election process. Karnataka High Court.
  • 20-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The period of limitation stops running on the date on which the request for referring the dispute to arbitration is received by the respondent and not the date on which the statement of claims was filed. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The period of limitation stops running on the date on which the request for referring the dispute to arbitration is received by the respondent and not the date on which the statement of claims was filed. Karnataka High Court.
  • 19-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Where civil suit seeking declaration of ownership was abandoned, writ proceedings premised on the same claim ought not to be entertained in absence of any explanation as to why the suit was abandoned. Order of the single judge based on non-existing order set aside. Karnataka High Court.
Where civil suit seeking declaration of ownership was abandoned, writ proceedings premised on the same claim ought not to be entertained in absence of any explanation as to why the suit was abandoned. Order of the single judge based on non-existing order set aside. Karnataka High Court.
  • 19-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
POCSO Act and Section 376 of the IPC. Enemity between the families of the accused and the victim coupled with negative DNA report are factors to be taken note of. Where the victim's testimony is inconsistent, the medical evidence is inconclusive, and there is an unexplained, inordinate delay in filing the FIR, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Karnataka High Court.
POCSO Act and Section 376 of the IPC. Enemity between the families of the accused and the victim coupled with negative DNA report are factors to be taken note of. Where the victim's testimony is inconsistent, the medical evidence is inconclusive, and there is an unexplained, inordinate delay in filing the FIR, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Karnataka High Court.
  • 19-February-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A plea of constructive res judicata under Order II Rule 2 of the CPC cannot be raised for the first time at the appellate stage, unless the necessary factual foundation, specifically the nature of the cause of action in the earlier suit was pleaded in the written statement. Karnataka High Court.
A plea of constructive res judicata under Order II Rule 2 of the CPC cannot be raised for the first time at the appellate stage, unless the necessary factual foundation, specifically the nature of the cause of action in the earlier suit was pleaded in the written statement. Karnataka High Court.
  • 19-February-2026
  • 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

Client Reviews

Client Review 1
Client Review 2
Client Review 3
Client Review 4
'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