Hindu Succession Act. A son or grandson cannot claim coparcenary rights by birth in property that has devolved upon his father in his individual capacity under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Hindu Succession Act. A son or grandson cannot claim coparcenary rights by birth in property that has devolved upon his father in his individual capacity under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
  • 12-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Hindu Law. A son-in-law does not become a member or coparcener of his father-in-law’s Hindu joint family merely by residing with the family or assisting in acquiring properties. Any contribution towards joint acquisition may support a claim of co-ownership, subject to proof, but does not confer coparcenary status. Karnataka High Court.
Hindu Law. A son-in-law does not become a member or coparcener of his father-in-law’s Hindu joint family merely by residing with the family or assisting in acquiring properties. Any contribution towards joint acquisition may support a claim of co-ownership, subject to proof, but does not confer coparcenary status. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-November-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
Service Law. Mere assignment of additional duties, even for a considerable period, does not confer a vested right to the status, designation or pay scale attached to another post. Creation of posts, determination of cadre strength and fixation of pay scales fall within the executive domain. A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel creation of a non-existent post or grant service benefits contrary to the governing recruitment and cadre rules. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1801
Service Law. Mere assignment of additional duties, even for a considerable period, does not confer a vested right to the status, designation or pay scale attached to another post. Creation of posts, determination of cadre strength and fixation of pay scales fall within the executive domain. A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel creation of a non-existent post or grant service benefits contrary to the governing recruitment and cadre rules. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1801
  • 12-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
CPC. Order XXI Rule 85 which requires a court auction purchaser to pay the full purchase money into court before the court closes on the fifteenth day from the date of sale are strictly mandatory. Non-compliance with this 15-day time limit renders the entire auction sale and the subsequent issuance of a sale certificate a complete nullity. Karnataka High Court.
CPC. Order XXI Rule 85 which requires a court auction purchaser to pay the full purchase money into court before the court closes on the fifteenth day from the date of sale are strictly mandatory. Non-compliance with this 15-day time limit renders the entire auction sale and the subsequent issuance of a sale certificate a complete nullity. Karnataka High Court.
  • 13-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Findings recorded by the High Court in earlier proceedings arising under a special statute cannot, by themselves, constitute a ground for rejection of a plaint in a subsequent civil suit involving disputed questions of title and allegations of fraud. The plea of res judicata, requiring examination of earlier pleadings, issues and judgments cannot be decided by conducting a mini-trial at the stage of rejection of plaint. Karnataka High Court.
Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Findings recorded by the High Court in earlier proceedings arising under a special statute cannot, by themselves, constitute a ground for rejection of a plaint in a subsequent civil suit involving disputed questions of title and allegations of fraud. The plea of res judicata, requiring examination of earlier pleadings, issues and judgments cannot be decided by conducting a mini-trial at the stage of rejection of plaint. Karnataka High Court.
  • 12-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Order XLI Rule 27 CPC. Additional evidence at the appellate stage must have a foundation in the existing pleadings. An appellate court cannot reject an amendment of pleadings yet permit additional evidence to substantiate the very case sought to be introduced through that amendment, when such evidence falls outside the existing pleadings. Karnataka High Court.
Order XLI Rule 27 CPC. Additional evidence at the appellate stage must have a foundation in the existing pleadings. An appellate court cannot reject an amendment of pleadings yet permit additional evidence to substantiate the very case sought to be introduced through that amendment, when such evidence falls outside the existing pleadings. Karnataka High Court.
  • 12-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Public Trust. Section 92 CPC applies only to representative suits concerning an alleged breach of trust or seeking directions for the administration of a public charitable or religious trust; it does not extend to disputes involving individual civil rights arising from a trust. A suit seeking enforcement of an individual's personal or civil rights arising from a Trust Deed does not fall within Section 92. Karnataka High Court.
Public Trust. Section 92 CPC applies only to representative suits concerning an alleged breach of trust or seeking directions for the administration of a public charitable or religious trust; it does not extend to disputes involving individual civil rights arising from a trust. A suit seeking enforcement of an individual's personal or civil rights arising from a Trust Deed does not fall within Section 92. Karnataka High Court.
  • 12-November-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Daughters who seek a share in family properties by filing a suit for partition against their parents cannot evade their obligation to maintain their parents or shift the entire burden onto their brothers. Both sons and daughters are under a statutory and moral obligation to maintain their parents under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1739
Daughters who seek a share in family properties by filing a suit for partition against their parents cannot evade their obligation to maintain their parents or shift the entire burden onto their brothers. Both sons and daughters are under a statutory and moral obligation to maintain their parents under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court. 2026 Daksha Legal Kar 1739
  • 08-November-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