State cannot exploit human labour for decades against sanctioned posts. Where an employer/State regularizes the services of junior or similarly situated daily-wage employees from a common recommended list, denying the same benefit to a senior, qualified employee who served for decades constitutes arbitrary discrimination violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
State cannot exploit human labour for decades against sanctioned posts. Where an employer/State regularizes the services of junior or similarly situated daily-wage employees from a common recommended list, denying the same benefit to a senior, qualified employee who served for decades constitutes arbitrary discrimination violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
  • 01-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
CPC. Section 96(3) read with Order XXIII Rules 3 and 3A. The bar against challenging a compromise decree applies only to parties to the compromise and not to a stranger who was neither a party to the original proceedings nor to the compromise. Such a person can assert an independent right establishing prejudice to his rights or interests and obtain leave of the appellate court. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 816
CPC. Section 96(3) read with Order XXIII Rules 3 and 3A. The bar against challenging a compromise decree applies only to parties to the compromise and not to a stranger who was neither a party to the original proceedings nor to the compromise. Such a person can assert an independent right establishing prejudice to his rights or interests and obtain leave of the appellate court. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 816
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Why is a regime-change revolution difficult in India?
Why is a regime-change revolution difficult in India?
  • 21-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Article
News
Electricity Act. The power of the Tribunal to review its decision Section 22(3)(f) is akin to the power of a civil court under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. (ii) The Tribunal can review its decision on either of the grounds enumerated in Order 47 Rule 1 and not otherwise. Supreme Court.
Electricity Act. The power of the Tribunal to review its decision Section 22(3)(f) is akin to the power of a civil court under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. (ii) The Tribunal can review its decision on either of the grounds enumerated in Order 47 Rule 1 and not otherwise. Supreme Court.
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Cr.P.C. Order Taking Cognizance. Absence of reasons or apparent application of mind in an order taking cognizance does not mandate remand; the High Court may supplement the reasons if the police report contains supporting material or quash the proceedings if no such material exists. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1529
Cr.P.C. Order Taking Cognizance. Absence of reasons or apparent application of mind in an order taking cognizance does not mandate remand; the High Court may supplement the reasons if the police report contains supporting material or quash the proceedings if no such material exists. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1529
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Prevention of Money Laundering Act. When an accused is finally absolved of the scheduled/predicate offences by a competent court through an order of discharge, acquittal, or quashing, the proceedings initiated under the Act cannot survive since the foundation of a money laundering case relies entirely on the existence of ‘proceeds of crime’ derived from a scheduled offence. Karnataka High Court.
Prevention of Money Laundering Act. When an accused is finally absolved of the scheduled/predicate offences by a competent court through an order of discharge, acquittal, or quashing, the proceedings initiated under the Act cannot survive since the foundation of a money laundering case relies entirely on the existence of ‘proceeds of crime’ derived from a scheduled offence. Karnataka High Court.
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Life Insurance. The doctrine of utmost good faith obligates the insured to fully and truthfully disclose all material facts, including medical history, in the proposal form. Suppression of material information renders the policy void ab initio, entitling the insurer to repudiate the death claim, irrespective of whether the concealed medical condition had any nexus with the actual cause of death. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1543
Life Insurance. The doctrine of utmost good faith obligates the insured to fully and truthfully disclose all material facts, including medical history, in the proposal form. Suppression of material information renders the policy void ab initio, entitling the insurer to repudiate the death claim, irrespective of whether the concealed medical condition had any nexus with the actual cause of death. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1543
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Service Law. Even a retired employee can seek regularization provided the employee initiated or agitated his claim during his subsisting service and seeks consequential pensionary or monetary benefits flowing from such regularization. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1557
Service Law. Even a retired employee can seek regularization provided the employee initiated or agitated his claim during his subsisting service and seeks consequential pensionary or monetary benefits flowing from such regularization. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1557
  • 31-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Legislative power to override Judicial decisions. The Legislature cannot, under the guise of a validating enactment, nullify a judgment of the Court or legitimise a recruitment process judicially declared illegal on account of rampant corruption and blatant nepotism. Such legislative interference amounts to an impermissible exercise of judicial power and violates the rule of law. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 810.
Legislative power to override Judicial decisions. The Legislature cannot, under the guise of a validating enactment, nullify a judgment of the Court or legitimise a recruitment process judicially declared illegal on account of rampant corruption and blatant nepotism. Such legislative interference amounts to an impermissible exercise of judicial power and violates the rule of law. Supreme Court. 2026 Daksha Legal SC 810.
  • 30-October-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement

Become A Member Get Instant Update

Daksha Legal Seminars

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
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
'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