Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 226 to Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 233Nominal Index:C Bhavani @Hamsa AND The Petitions Committee Karnataka Legislative Council & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 226M/S. KALPATHARU BREWERIES & DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 227Muthulaxmi B N AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw...
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 226 to Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 233
Nominal Index:
C Bhavani @Hamsa AND The Petitions Committee Karnataka Legislative Council & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 226
M/S. KALPATHARU BREWERIES & DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 227
Muthulaxmi B N AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 228
Venugopal Krishnamurthy & ANR AND M Tejaswini. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 229
Suresh Babu C AND V Varadarajan & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 230
Mohamed Umar Seeni Ariff Khan & ANR AND Mrs Tanzia Bano. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 231
M/S. VISWAS TEXTILE PROCESSORS AND ICICI BANK LIMITED & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 232
Prajwal Revanna AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 233
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: C Bhavani @Hamsa AND The Petitions Committee Karnataka Legislative Council & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 30129 OF 2017
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 226
The Karnataka High Court has set aside a direction issued by the Petition Committee of the Karnataka Legislative Council regarding the alleged encroachment of a public road in Rajakaluve.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by C Bhavani @Hamsa and quashed the directive issued by the Committee on March 8, 2017. It said “The impugned direction dated 8.3.2017 issued by the Respondent No.1, is hereby quashed.”
Case Title: M/S. KALPATHARU BREWERIES & DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.26031 OF 2017 (LB - RES) C/W Others
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 227
The Karnataka High Court has held that the Gram Panchayat cannot levy or collect property taxes in respect of Industrial establishments located within areas notified by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). Mere execution of a lease-cum-sale agreement or any administrative communication cannot vest power in the Gram Panchayat to levy tax in the absence of express delegation or statutory backing.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum held thus while allowing a batch of petitions and quashing the demand notices issued by the Sompura Gram Panchayat levying property tax on the industrial property of the petitioners located within the notified industrial area established and maintained by the respondent-Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB).
Case Title: Muthulaxmi B N AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.10897 OF 2024
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 228
"Justice Delayed Is Justice Dented", said the Karnataka High Court while imposing exemplary cost of Rs 2 Lakh on the Chairman, members of District Caste and Income Verification Committee of Hassan District for refusing to issue a caste and income certificate to an assistant Public Prosecutor, despite the law being settled on this aspect.
The court underscored that the cost will be paid to the lawyer out of their own funds and not from State's funds, observing that the imposition of such cost is to be seen as a cautionary call to those who hold public office that dereliction cloaked in ignorance shall find no refuge before court.
Case Title: Venugopal Krishnamurthy & ANR AND M Tejaswini
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.21479 OF 2024.
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 229
"Judicial discretion must not be exercised in favour of a party indulging in contumacious defiance. No party has a right to be heard on merits, when interim orders are violated with impunity,” said the Karnataka High Court while quashing a trial court order which rejected a landlord' plea to strike off the tenant's defence in an eviction suit.
Noting that the tenant had not paid arrears of rent for the last five years despite court orders, Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the application filed by property owner Venugopal Krishnamurthy. The bench said,
Case Title: Suresh Babu C AND V Varadarajan & ANR
Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1340 OF 2025
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 230
The Karnataka High Court has held that the moment a landlord files a counter-claim seeking ejectment preceded by a statutory notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, the very foundation of the tenant's suit for injunction alleging unlawful dispossession collapses.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum held thus while dismissing an appeal filed by a tenant, Suresh Babu C, challenging the trial court order which held that in a bare suit for injunction filed by the appellant/tenant, the respondents/landlords are entitled to seek relief of ejectment by filing a counter claim.
Case Title: Mohamed Umar Seeni Ariff Khan & ANR AND Mrs Tanzia Bano
Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 366 OF 2025 (CPC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 332 OF 2025 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 458 OF 2025 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 489 OF 2025.
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 231
The Karnataka High Court has said that provisions of the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, must be interpreted in a purposive and inclusive manner, to not exclude genuine relationships from legal protection, simply due to procedural irregularities.
Justice Ramachandra D Huddar further clarified that “Even if a marriage is not registered under the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, it can still be treated as valid marriage under Indian law for interim purposes, particularly when party asserting the marriage supports it with documents such as photos, proof of residence, joint account or correspondence.”
Case Title: M/S. VISWAS TEXTILE PROCESSORS AND ICICI BANK LIMITED & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17588 OF 2022
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 232
The Karnataka High Court has said that misappropriation of funds, or loss of funds from a customer's 'current account' maintained by a banking institution, is a commercial dispute and the customer's recovery suit against the bank is maintainable before the Commercial Court.
Justice M Nagaprasanna held thus while allowing the petition filed by M/s. Viswas Textile Processors. The petitioner had approached the court against an order passed by the Commercial Court dated August 30, 2022, holding that the petitioner's recovery suit was not maintainable before it.
“The suit instituted by the petitioner-plaintiff for misappropriation of funds, or loss of funds from the current account maintained by the banking institution, based on the withdrawals of money by defendant No.3 by encashing forged cheques would become the subject matter of a commercial dispute, as it is arising from the ordinary transaction between the petitioner-plaintiff and defendant No.1 - banking institution.”
Case Title: Prajwal Revanna AND State of Karnataka
Case No: Criminal Petition 3292/2025
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 233
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday relegated former JD(S) MP Prajwal Revanna to the Sessions Court for seeking regular bail in the alleged rape and sexual assault case against him. The court has, however, granted him liberty to approach HC after exhausting his remedy in the trial court.
Dealing with his second successive bail plea, a bench of Justice SR Krishna Kumar directed that if Revanna moves the Sessions Court, his plea must be disposed of within 10 days. The single judge passed this order after extensively hearing arguments from both sides for several weeks.
"In my considered opinion, in the facts of the case and circumstances it would be appropriate to relegate the petitioner to exhaust his remedy before the trial court and reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach this court thereafter," the single judge observed in its order disposing Revanna's plea.