Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: January 27 To February 02, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 28 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 37

Nominal Index:

M/s Renram Fashions India Pvt Ltd AND The ESI Corporation. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 28

Vikas C V & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 29

V Keshavamurthy AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 30

Hindustan Aeronautics Officers Guild AND Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 31

Dr Natesha D B AND Directorate of Enforcement. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 32

Sushil Kumar Churiwala AND Akshay Bansal. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 33

Prafula M Bhat & Others AND Saraswati Shahstri & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 34

ABC AND State Of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 35

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE v. M/S ASHOKA BIOGREEN PVT. LTD. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 36

Karnataka SC/ST, Backward Classes and Minorities Advocates Federation AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 37

Judgments/Orders

Objection Regarding Court's Jurisdiction Must Be Raised At Earliest Possible Opportunity, Not After Adverse Order Is Passed: Karnataka HC

Case Title: M/s Renram Fashions India Pvt Ltd AND The ESI Corporation.

Case No: REVIEW PETITION NO.598 OF 2024 IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.3185 OF 2017

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 28

The Karnataka High Court has said that any objection with regard to jurisdiction of a court in adjudicating an appeal has to be raised at the earliest possible opportunity by a party and it cannot be raised after the passing of the order which has gone against it.

A single judge, Justice H P Sandesh dismissed a review petition filed by M/s Renram Fashions India Pvt Ltd, which had moved after the single judge had set aside an of the ESI court which had partly allowed the plea filed by the company and modified the order passed directing petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.26,34,569, towards damages for the delay in payment of contribution for the period from January 2009 to June 2013.

Unfortunate That Age-Old Menace Of Dowry Death Still Exists In Society: Karnataka HC Declines To Quash Case Against Husband, In-Laws

Case Title: Vikas C V & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.2730 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 29

The Karnataka High Court has held that merely because the deceased had scribed that no one is responsible in the death note, a court, while relying on the same, cannot quash the proceedings initiated against husband and in-laws for charges of cruelty and dowry death.

Justice M Nagaprasanna held thus while dismissing the petition filed by Vikas C V and others who are charged under Sections 498A (cruelty), 304B (dowry death) r/w Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL To Permit Holding Of Bull/ Bullock Cart Race In Kolar District

Case Title: V Keshavamurthy AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 35617/2024.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 30

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to the Deputy Commissioner of Kolar District, to grant permission for conducting a bulls race/bullock cart race, in Dullapalli village of the District scheduled in January 2025.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice M I Arun dismissed the petition filed by V Keshavamurthy and said “It is entirely for the authorities to consider the subject matter, the court will not intervene in any fashion.”

Company's Order Reversing Pay Hike Upsets Employee's Financial Planning: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside HAL Circular

Case Title: Hindustan Aeronautics Officers Guild AND Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14734 OF 2021

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 31

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a circular issued by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), whereby it sought to re-fix the pay of Officers, which came to be increased, in the year 2017.

A single judge, Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav allowed the petition filed by 'Hindustan Aeronautics Officers Guild' and set aside the Circular dated 24.07.2021, issued by the employer. It also clarified that the pay fixation (presently being paid) would continue to hold the field.

ED Can't Trample Upon Individual Liberty & Privacy, Search & Seizure Operations Must Adhere To Procedural Fairness Under PMLA: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Dr Natesha D B AND Directorate of Enforcement

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 32956 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 32

The Karnataka High Court has observed that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot give the elements of procedural fairness contained in the Prevention of Money Laundering (PMLA) a go-by in the course of its administration.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar made the observation while allowing the petition filed by former Commissioner of Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA), Dr Natesha D B, during whose tenure alleged illegal allotment of land sites was made to Chief Minister Siddaramiah's wife Paravathi.

Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Should Not Be Equated With Those Convicted Under Other Penal Statutes: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sushil Kumar Churiwala AND Akshay Bansal

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1043 OF 2022

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 33

The Karnataka High Court recently observed that an accused who has suffered an order of conviction in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pertaining to cheque dishonour, should not be equated with that of an accused who has been convicted for other penal statutes.

Justice V Srishananda held thus while setting aside the six-month imprisonment handed down to one Sushil Kumar Churiwala by the trial court along with payment of fine while "maintaining the order of conviction".

"From the directions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Indian Bank Association supra, it is clear that the prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is in the nature of quasi civil and quasi criminal in nature. Therefore, the Courts while exercising its discretion at the time of passing the appropriate sentence in a given case, is entitled to use its discretionary power in awarding imprisonment or fine or with both. At any rate, an accused who has suffered an order of conviction in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, should not be equated with that of a accused who has been convicted for other penal statutes," the court said.

Daughter Born Before Partition Of Ancestral Property Prior To Amendment Of S.6 Of Hindu Succession Act Cannot Claim Right In Father's Share: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Prafula M Bhat & Others AND Saraswati Shahstri & Others.

Case No: RFA NO.100103 OF 2014

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 34

The Karnataka High Court has said that daughter who was already born at the time of a partition that took place before 20th December 2004 (Amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act), between the father and his sons, cannot be elevated to the status of the daughter born after the partition and cannot claim the share in the property allotted to the father or challenge the alienation made by the father, after 2005 amendment.

A single judge, Justice Anant Ramanathe Hegde held thus while dismissing the appeal filed by Prafulla M Bhat and others. The appellants had challenged the trial court order which had dismissed their suit for partition and seeking equal rights in the ancestral property held by their deceased father Mahadev. Challenge was also raised to the gift deed executed by Mahadev in favour of his second wife.

Wife Cannot Be Charged With Extortion For Seeking, Being Granted Maintenance By A Competent Court: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC AND State Of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.3809 OF 2024 (GM – RES) C/W WRIT PETITION No.28591 OF 2023.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 35

The Karnataka High Court has held that there cannot be an offence of extortion registered against the wife when she initiates proceedings for maintenance and the concerned Court grants maintenance amount to her.

A single judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna held thus while allowing a petition filed by a wife seeking to quash the complaint registered by the husband under Sections 420, 406, 403, 109, 384 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The bench said “In the considered view of the Court, there cannot be an offence of extortion when the wife initiates proceedings for maintenance and the concerned Court grants maintenance. Those are legal proceedings, pursuant to which the husband is legally bound to pay, unless it is altered or modified by the superior Court.”

Double Payment For Same Claim Violates Public Policy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE v. M/S ASHOKA BIOGREEN PVT. LTD.

Case Number: COMMERCIAL APPEAL No. 427 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 36

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice K. V. Aravind held that the issue of double payment for the same claim would undoubtedly be in direct conflict with the Public Policy of India and would violate the Fundamental Policy of Indian Law, as well as the basic principles of morality and justice.

Additionally, the court held that it is well established in law that double payment for the settlement of a single claim is impermissible.

Karnataka HC Declines Plea To Reserve Seats For SC/ST, Backward Community Members In Governing Council Of Advocates' Association Bengaluru

Case Title: Karnataka SC/ST, Backward Classes and Minorities Advocates Federation AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 2791/2025.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 37

The Karnataka High Court on Saturday refused to grant any relief in a petition seeking a direction to the Advocates Association, Bengaluru to take steps for providing overall 50 percent reservation to SC/ST and backward communities, which may also include women reservation in the governing body of the Association, during the ensuing elections.

A single judge, Justice R Devdas disposed of the petition filed by Karnataka SC/ST, Backward Classes and Minorities Advocates Federation and said “This court has to once again reiterate that this court will not be in a position to issue such directions to enable reservation for few of the posts in the office bearers or governing council to members belonging to SC/ST and backward communities. If at all such a direction is to be issued it is only at the hands of the Supreme Court, which can invoke its extraordinary power under Article 142 of Constitution of India.”