Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Karnataka High Court while expressing its shock over unlikeliness of sexual abuse in open places, quashed the charges of sexual harassment and fraud against the petitioner
The Karnataka High Court, while deliberating over a father’s prayer seeking repatriation of his minor son to Germany, dismissed the petition on ground of the child’s best interests and allowed the son to remain with his mother in India.
Karnataka High Court observed that consent of a woman on a promise to marry is always an enigma.
The Karnataka High Court held that order granting visitation rights to the father is outside the jurisdictional scope of Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
The Karnataka High Court held that merely mentioning an individual’s caste during an altercation with no intention to insult, would not attract the provisions of the SC/ ST Act
Upholding the Karnataka High Court order, the Supreme Court held that the Karnataka High Court has not committed any error in permitting the respondents to file affidavits/additional evidence in the proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. However, permitted the appellant to cross-examine and/or produce contrary evidence.
The Karnataka High Court strictly admonished the petitioner for abusing every jurisdiction of law but refused to impose exemplary costs as the same would only increase the agony of the petitioner, whose marriage was annulled albeit with consent.
In an impassioned ruling, the single Judge Bench of the Karnataka High Court observed that the word “men” in the impugned Guideline perpetrates gender bias and misogyny and urged that there is an imperative need of change of nomenclature from ‘ex-servicemen’ to that of ‘ex-service personnel’
After an extensive tenure of 6 years, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer retires today. During this time, Justice Nazeer had been a part of some path-breaking decisions such as- Right to Privacy, Triple Talaq, Ayodhya verdict etc. Justice Nazeer has also been the part of the Constitution Bench which decided upon the validity of Central Govt’s 2016 Demonetisation Scheme.
Karnataka High Court observed that merely because Covaxin is being taken by public, it will not make a private contract enforceable or justiciable in the Courts of law, which are pre-dominantly meant for public law remedy.
Karnataka High Court was deliberating over petitions filed by two private sector employees, who were denied BH-Series vehicle registration in pursuance of a communication issued by the State Government dt. 20-12-2021, which excluded private sector employees in the first phase
The Govt. of India had imposed a ban of PFI declaring it an unlawful organisation under the UAPA. The Notification banning the organisation was given ‘immediate effect’, which was then challenged before the High Court
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant appeal filed by ‘Vogue Institute of Management’ challenging the Trial Court’s permanent injunction
Supreme Court: In an appeal filed against the judgment of Karnataka High Court reducing the total compensation from Rs. 21,08,400/-
Karnataka High Court: In the instant petition for quashment, the issue arose that whether a legal heir should be permitted to come
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant application seeking regular bail for offences under the provisions of Prohibition of Child
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant appeal for restoration assailing the order passed by the Trial Court wherein the
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant writ petition wherein an elected member of Federation of Karnataka Chambers of Commerce
Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant matter arising out of a fake surety for bail which had been created