Latest court orders, judgments, and legal developments from Indian courts — AI-curated and summarized.
The Karnataka High Court upholds the 2013 Act providing compensation and tax exemptions for KIADB land acquisitions from 2014 onward, dismissing the writ appeals.
The Karnataka High Court upheld the equal coparcenary rights of daughters, affirming that the defendant could not prove an independent source of income for the disputed properties. This ruling further solidifies women's inheritance rights.
The Karnataka High Court affirmed the equal coparcenary rights of daughters, ruling that the defendant's failure to prove independent income for property acquisition invalidated any exclusion claims.
The ITAT has ruled that profits from the sale of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) are taxable under the head 'Capital Gains,' clarifying the tax implications when existing land is surrendered.
The Karnataka High Court held that landowners under Joint Development Agreements (JDAs) are considered co-promoters under the RERA framework, upholding the validity of an auction notice.
The Karnataka HC has upheld an auction notice under RERA, concluding that landowners under Joint Development Agreements (JDA) qualify as co-promoters. This ruling establishes key clarifications regarding responsibilities under real estate laws.
The Supreme Court has quashed an FIR against a property vendee, determining that the sale had been duly authorized by a Power of Attorney (PoA). The court ruled that the dispute did not warrant criminal action against the vendee.
The SAFEMA Tribunal has ruled that the Enforcement Directorate cannot attach properties bought by bona fide buyers in a developer's fraud case, clarifying the definition of 'proceeds of crime'.
In a ruling involving the determination of the Sale Deed Value (SDV), the ITAT clarified that the date of allotment should be treated as the effective date of agreement in property transactions, rather than the date of registration.
The SAFEMA Tribunal ruled that accounted plots belonging to bona fide buyers cannot be considered as proceeds of crime in a developer’s fraud case, thereby protecting the rights of such buyers.
The SAFEMA Tribunal has determined that accounted plots belonging to alleged bona fide buyers cannot be classified as proceeds of crime, thereby preventing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) from attaching these assets in a developer fraud case.
The Supreme Court of India ruled that revenue map corrections cannot reopen settled disputes under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, setting a precedent for future cases.