Commercial Courts Act does not oust arbitration, but provides for recourse to the Commercial Division, the Commercial Appellate Division, or the Commercial Court, to the limited extent as contemplated under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
Commercial Courts Act does not oust arbitration, but provides for recourse to the Commercial Division, the Commercial Appellate Division, or the Commercial Court, to the limited extent as contemplated under the Act. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order 21 Rule 54 CPC. Third-party buyers who have acquired interests in the property have a substantive legal right to be heard. The Court is duty-bound to allow such buyers to file their objections and must adjudicate upon them before maintaining an attachment that jeopardizes their investments. Karnataka High Court.
Order 21 Rule 54 CPC. Third-party buyers who have acquired interests in the property have a substantive legal right to be heard. The Court is duty-bound to allow such buyers to file their objections and must adjudicate upon them before maintaining an attachment that jeopardizes their investments. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-April-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
Code of Criminal Procedure. For the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468, the relevant date is the date on which the complaint is filed or the date on which criminal proceedings are initiated, and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence. The judicial time taken by a Magistrate in processing the complaint or taking cognizance cannot be held against the complainant to bar the prosecution. Supreme Court.
Code of Criminal Procedure. For the purpose of computing the period of limitation under Section 468, the relevant date is the date on which the complaint is filed or the date on which criminal proceedings are initiated, and not the date on which the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence. The judicial time taken by a Magistrate in processing the complaint or taking cognizance cannot be held against the complainant to bar the prosecution. Supreme Court.
  • 13-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Constitution of India. Article 226(2) confers wide territorial jurisdiction on High Courts wherever any part of the cause of action arises, to be construed liberally across interconnected events. Orders passed in such jurisdiction have extra-territorial effect and bind all authorities, who are duty-bound to comply irrespective of location; any non-compliance constitutes a breach of constitutional obligation and is amenable to correction by writ of mandamus. Karnataka High Court.
Constitution of India. Article 226(2) confers wide territorial jurisdiction on High Courts wherever any part of the cause of action arises, to be construed liberally across interconnected events. Orders passed in such jurisdiction have extra-territorial effect and bind all authorities, who are duty-bound to comply irrespective of location; any non-compliance constitutes a breach of constitutional obligation and is amenable to correction by writ of mandamus. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Pigmy agents employed by banks cannot be treated as business facilitators for them to be coming under the GST and the services rendered by them are exempt from levy of GST. Karnataka High Court.
Pigmy agents employed by banks cannot be treated as business facilitators for them to be coming under the GST and the services rendered by them are exempt from levy of GST. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC. A fresh suit to set aside a compromise decree on the ground that the compromise was not lawful is strictly barred for any party who was a signatory to the compromise. A party cannot circumvent this statutory bar by joining additional properties or impleading new parties to give the appearance of a new cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC. A fresh suit to set aside a compromise decree on the ground that the compromise was not lawful is strictly barred for any party who was a signatory to the compromise. A party cannot circumvent this statutory bar by joining additional properties or impleading new parties to give the appearance of a new cause of action. Karnataka High Court.
  • 11-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Allegations of fraud, criminal wrongdoing, or statutory violations do not, by themselves, oust the jurisdiction of an Arbitral Tribunal. Disputes arising from civil or contractual relationships remain arbitrable where covered by a valid arbitration agreement. Karnataka High Court.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Allegations of fraud, criminal wrongdoing, or statutory violations do not, by themselves, oust the jurisdiction of an Arbitral Tribunal. Disputes arising from civil or contractual relationships remain arbitrable where covered by a valid arbitration agreement. Karnataka High Court.
  • 11-April-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Police shall not act as debt recovery agents by converting civil disputes into criminal charges without proper legal basis or evidence of criminality involved. Karnataka High Court.
Police shall not act as debt recovery agents by converting civil disputes into criminal charges without proper legal basis or evidence of criminality involved. Karnataka High Court.
  • 10-April-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