Motor Vehicles Act. A claimant must establish at least one of the statutory criteria—place of accident, or the residence/place of business of the claimant or respondent. A mere assertion of temporary residence, unsupported by evidence, is insufficient. Where the accident occurred outside the jurisdiction, all parties reside outside it, and the insurer has no branch office there, the MACT lacks territorial jurisdiction, rendering its award void ab initio and non est in law. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. A claimant must establish at least one of the statutory criteria—place of accident, or the residence/place of business of the claimant or respondent. A mere assertion of temporary residence, unsupported by evidence, is insufficient. Where the accident occurred outside the jurisdiction, all parties reside outside it, and the insurer has no branch office there, the MACT lacks territorial jurisdiction, rendering its award void ab initio and non est in law. Karnataka High Court.
  • 31-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Mysore Hindu Law Women's Rights Act, 1933. When joint family property devolves upon a sole surviving male coparcener prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act 1956, the female heirs would also acquire right over the joint family property. Karnataka High Court.
Mysore Hindu Law Women's Rights Act, 1933. When joint family property devolves upon a sole surviving male coparcener prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act 1956, the female heirs would also acquire right over the joint family property. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-July-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. Section 319. While the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. requires a higher degree of satisfaction than a mere prima facie case, the trial court has the discretion to decide the application with or without waiting for cross-examination based on the cogency of the examination in chief. Unsubstantiated defenses such as a plea of alibi raised by proposed accused cannot be used to defeat a Section 319 application at the threshold, as the burden of proving an alibi rests entirely on the accused during the course of the trial. Karnataka High Court.
Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 319. While the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. requires a higher degree of satisfaction than a mere prima facie case, the trial court has the discretion to decide the application with or without waiting for cross-examination based on the cogency of the examination in chief. Unsubstantiated defenses such as a plea of alibi raised by proposed accused cannot be used to defeat a Section 319 application at the threshold, as the burden of proving an alibi rests entirely on the accused during the course of the trial. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Motor Vehicles Act. Where a fatal accident is caused by the rash and negligent driving of an uninsured/unlicensed owner of the vehicle and who is also the father of the claimants and husband of the deceased, the equitable principle of ‘Pay and Recover’ cannot be invoked against the insurance company. Consequently, for policy condition breaches involving intra-familial tortfeasors, the insurer is completely exonerated. Karnataka High Court.
Motor Vehicles Act. Where a fatal accident is caused by the rash and negligent driving of an uninsured/unlicensed owner of the vehicle and who is also the father of the claimants and husband of the deceased, the equitable principle of ‘Pay and Recover’ cannot be invoked against the insurance company. Consequently, for policy condition breaches involving intra-familial tortfeasors, the insurer is completely exonerated. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Though a Lokayukta report is not a decree, it becomes binding on statutory authorities once affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. Karnataka High Court deprecates the BDA for violating the rules and depriving a landowner of his right of way to benefit a real estate developer, in disregard of the affirmed Lokayukta report.
Though a Lokayukta report is not a decree, it becomes binding on statutory authorities once affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. Karnataka High Court deprecates the BDA for violating the rules and depriving a landowner of his right of way to benefit a real estate developer, in disregard of the affirmed Lokayukta report.
  • 30-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Hindu Succession Act. A daughter is entitled to an equal share in coparcenary/joint ancestral property irrespective of whether she was born before or after 1956. Denying coparcenary rights to a daughter born prior to 1956 violates the mandate of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Succession Act. A daughter is entitled to an equal share in coparcenary/joint ancestral property irrespective of whether she was born before or after 1956. Denying coparcenary rights to a daughter born prior to 1956 violates the mandate of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Karnataka High Court.
  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A mere subsequent failure to repay a loan or perform a contractual obligation, even after a long-standing relationship involving multiple transactions, does not retrospectively convert a civil dispute into a criminal offence. Where the complaint contains no specific averment of deception or dishonest inducement at the outset, the essential ingredients of cheating are not made out and the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
A mere subsequent failure to repay a loan or perform a contractual obligation, even after a long-standing relationship involving multiple transactions, does not retrospectively convert a civil dispute into a criminal offence. Where the complaint contains no specific averment of deception or dishonest inducement at the outset, the essential ingredients of cheating are not made out and the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
  • 29-July-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Occupancy rights cannot be granted on the basis of oral evidence when official revenue records unequivocally establish that the land was Beelu (fallow) or otherwise uncultivated on the appointed day. In such circumstances, the statutory requirement of cultivation is not satisfied. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Occupancy rights cannot be granted on the basis of oral evidence when official revenue records unequivocally establish that the land was Beelu (fallow) or otherwise uncultivated on the appointed day. In such circumstances, the statutory requirement of cultivation is not satisfied. Karnataka High Court.
  • 29-July-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