Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court set aside the impugned judgment imposing the penalty under Article 5(e)(i) of the Schedule to the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The statute does not have a residual clause for Article 5(e) nor provides for a scenario where the property was previously handed over to the purchasee prior to the agreement to sell was to be entered into.
Since there was no agreement between the parties to make payment beyond the stipulated date. The judgment-debtor cannot escape liability from the consequences of a stipulated compliance agreed in a mediated settlement.
In the case at hand, it was contended that although the provisions of Order 13 Rule 9 CPC provide for return to the party who has filed, the petitioner could ask for the return of such documents.
In the present case, a motor vehicle accident involving 2 motorcycles resulted in grievous injuries to 1 appellant and the death of the other, a 30-year-old supervisor employed in a private company.
Holding that delay in filing a written statement can be condoned only in exceptional circumstances and not as a matter of routine, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a petition seeking to place a written statement on record after a delay of 4745 days.
The Karnataka High Court enhanced the motor accident compensation awarded to the husband and children of the deceased housewife from ₹7,60,000 to ₹10,02,888, correcting the notional income and adding future prospects that the Tribunal had failed to award
“Unless the breach is so fundamental that it has contributed to the cause of the accident, the Insurance Company cannot avoid its liability.”
Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed by BMRCL challenging Karnataka High Court judgment restoring arbitral award in favour of Navayuga Engineering Company, reiterating limited scope of interference under Sections 34 and 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and upholding award including finance charges as compensatory claim.
Quashing EPFO’s rejection orders, the Karnataka High Court holds that employees who contributed to Provident Fund on actual wages are entitled to exercise joint option for higher pension under EPS 1995, regardless of whether Trust Rules of their exempted establishment permitted pension fund contributions on higher wages.
In the present case, filmmaker Santosh Kumar sought cancellation of the CBFC certification granted for the screening of Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar 2” alleging that the film was a plagiarised version of his original script titled “D Saheb”.
In the present case, an FIR was filed against Ranveer Singh for allegedly mimicking the Daiva possession scene from the film Kantara during an event at IFFI, which was claimed to have hurt religious and cultural sentiments.
In the present case, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail with a condition to keep his location on, on his mobile and share the live location with the investigating officer.
“The facts of the present case disclose a peculiar and rather disturbing situation, wherein an educational institution has been drawn into the ambit of a criminal investigation solely Banker’s lien on the ground that it received a fee payment through an online transaction from a parent who is allegedly involved in a cyber offence.”
“While the organised sectors may be regulated through government orders and legislative intervention, the unorganised sector requires a more facilitative mechanism. However, beyond regulatory frameworks, what remains imperative is, a sustained and pervasive effort to sensitise all segments of society, reaching every corner of the State to foster awareness, empathy and compliance.”
“In the case at hand, the issue is not purely civil in nature, it has all the hues and forms of cyber crime and not a run on the mill allegation. It is the allegation of downloading, copying, deletion of source code, proprietary data, and confidential digital assets. All these are hues and forms of cyber crime and cyber crime investigations are highly technical and complex involving forensic reconstitution of data.”
“It is well settled that, in case of conflict between form and substance, substance must prevail, unless the law expressly mandates strict adherence to the form as well.”
“The law protects childhood, so that it may blossom into informed adulthood. This Court will not permit this protection to be diminished.”
Justice Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria was serving as the 34th Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court prior to being appointed as Judge of Supreme Court in May 2025.
“In absence of any material to show that the advertisement was at the instance of Rahul Gandhi, reliance on advertisement by itself could not lead to the assertion that it was published by him with the requisite intention to defame.”
The Court observed that the victim admitted being about 18 years old, while her father’s evidence on age was inconsistent. With contradictions between oral and medical evidence, minority was not proved, and hence, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 could not be invoked.