Partnership Act. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties or unless contrary intention appears, the property brought in as a capital contribution or business of a firm by a partner shall be treated as a property of the firm. Karnataka High Court.
Partnership Act. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties or unless contrary intention appears, the property brought in as a capital contribution or business of a firm by a partner shall be treated as a property of the firm. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Second wife who enters into a marriage during the subsistence of the husband’s first marriage does not qualify as a 'legally wedded wife' under the Hindu Marriage Act, and is consequently ineligible to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
Second wife who enters into a marriage during the subsistence of the husband’s first marriage does not qualify as a 'legally wedded wife' under the Hindu Marriage Act, and is consequently ineligible to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-March-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 Land Grant Rules. The gainful employment of the applicant’s family members is not a disqualification for the grant of land. Cancellation of the grant after a prolonged lapse of time is illegal. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules. The gainful employment of the applicant’s family members is not a disqualification for the grant of land. Cancellation of the grant after a prolonged lapse of time is illegal. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
A document evidencing the transfer of an interest in immovable property to a partnership firm, towards a partner’s share, does not require compulsory registration under the Registration Act. Karnataka High Court.
A document evidencing the transfer of an interest in immovable property to a partnership firm, towards a partner’s share, does not require compulsory registration under the Registration Act. Karnataka High Court.
  • 30-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Karnataka Land Grant Rules. Once a re-grant order under the Inams Abolition Act has attained finality, the Assistant Commissioner has no jurisdiction to examine the legality of alienations effected thereafter. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Land Grant Rules. Once a re-grant order under the Inams Abolition Act has attained finality, the Assistant Commissioner has no jurisdiction to examine the legality of alienations effected thereafter. Karnataka High Court.
  • 28-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Land acquisition. An agreement to sell does not, by itself, create any interest or title in the property nor does it entitle the agreement holder to claim compensation. Until an agreement of sale is taken to its 'logical conclusion' meaning the execution and registration of a sale deed, the rights of the holder remain purely contractual and not proprietary. Karnataka High Court.
Land acquisition. An agreement to sell does not, by itself, create any interest or title in the property nor does it entitle the agreement holder to claim compensation. Until an agreement of sale is taken to its 'logical conclusion' meaning the execution and registration of a sale deed, the rights of the holder remain purely contractual and not proprietary. Karnataka High Court.
  • 28-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
An allotment of land 'for mining purposes' by the KIADB conveys only the surface rights necessary to occupy the land; it does not bypass the statutory requirement to obtain a separate mining lease under the MMDR Act. Consequently, a challenge to a land allotment based on mining rules is unsustainable if the allotment itself does not purport to grant sub-surface mineral rights. Karnataka High Court.
An allotment of land 'for mining purposes' by the KIADB conveys only the surface rights necessary to occupy the land; it does not bypass the statutory requirement to obtain a separate mining lease under the MMDR Act. Consequently, a challenge to a land allotment based on mining rules is unsustainable if the allotment itself does not purport to grant sub-surface mineral rights. Karnataka High Court.
  • 28-March-2026
  • Daksha Legal
Judgement
Karnataka Stamp Act. While determining the market value of a leased property, registration authorities cannot rely solely on the guidance value. They are required to consider any restrictive clauses in the lease such as limitations on use, transfer, or enjoyment which may diminish the property’s value in comparison to an unencumbered freehold property. Karnataka High Court.
Karnataka Stamp Act. While determining the market value of a leased property, registration authorities cannot rely solely on the guidance value. They are required to consider any restrictive clauses in the lease such as limitations on use, transfer, or enjoyment which may diminish the property’s value in comparison to an unencumbered freehold property. Karnataka High Court.
  • 27-March-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