Lawwatch : Legal Resources for Advocates -

Concept of ‘Denial of Landlord’s Title’ under Section 11 (1) of the Kerala Rent Law

By K Rajasekharan 14 June 2026Rent Control & LeaseNo Comments

A Rent Control Court (RCC) cannot decide a complex property dispute in a summary trial under the rent control law. This core legal issue forms the foundation of rent control proceedings in India. Under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, a Rent Control Court is a specialized forum. It is designed to quickly resolve everyday fights between landlords and tenants.

Procedure for Seeking Guardianship of a Minor from the District Court in a Guardian O.P.

By K Rajasekharan 13 June 2026Property & SuccessionNo Comments

A minor or child of less than 18 years of age can own any property but cannot sell it or sign a document relating to its sale under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The property can only be sold by his/her natural guardian or a court-appointed guardian, with the prior permission of the District Court

Consequence of Non-mentioning or Wrong Mentioning of Law in Petition or Order

By K Rajasekharan 10 June 2026Civil Cases & ProceeduresNo Comments

It is settled law that once it is found that the power exists, the exercise of power under a wrong provision will not render the order illegal or invalid.

A Candidate with Higher Qualifications Has No Right to Be Considered for a Post Requiring Lower Qualifications

By K Rajasekharan 9 June 2026UncategorizedNo Comments

When a post is specifically intended for candidates possessing lower educational qualifications, allowing a person with higher qualifications to secure such employment would deprive a genuinely eligible and deserving candidate of the opportunity, the Supreme Court observed in General Manager (HR) & Anr v. K. Poovarasan [2026 INSC 581].

Scheduled Caste/Tribe Status of a Child Born to Inter-Caste Parents

By K Rajasekharan 8 June 2026Civil Cases & ProceeduresNo Comments

The Supreme Court, in Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika v. State of Gujarat & Others [(2012) 1 KLT 383], observed that in the case of an inter-caste marriage, or a marriage between a tribal and a non-tribal person, there may be a presumption that the child belongs to the caste of the father.

A Party to a Civil Suit Cannot Travel Beyond the Pleadings

By K Rajasekharan 7 June 2026Civil Cases & ProceeduresNo Comments

In L. Ponnayal @ Lakshmi v. Karuppannan (Dead) Thr. L.R. Sengoda Gounder & Anr. [AIR ONLINE 2018 SC 191], the Supreme Court of India held that civil suits are decided on the basis of pleadings and the issues framed thereon, and the parties to the suit cannot be permitted to travel beyond their pleadings.

Appoint Govt Pleaders and Public Prosecutors on Merit: Kerala High Court

By K Rajasekharan 4 June 2026Code of Criminal Procedures (CrPC)No Comments

The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court ruled in Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala [2025: KER:30823] that the State Government must give primacy to the opinion of the concerned District Judge during the consultative process for the appointment of Public Prosecutors, and mandated that the State frame internal guidelines ensuring strict conformity with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The judgment underscored the Supreme Corut direction that such appointments should be made only taking into consideration the merit of the candidate and no other consideration.

Failure to Mention Amount in Demand Notice in a Cheque Dishonour Case Renders the Notice Incomplete: Kerala High Court

By K Rajasekharan 3 June 2026Negotiable Instruments ActNo Comments

The Kerala High Court, in Rajesh K. v. Asokan P.K. [2026: KER:36763], held that a demand notice issued under Section 138 (b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act), is incomplete if it does not specify the amount demanded.

Victims of Heinous Crimes Cannot Be Subjected to Repeated Trauma of Cross-Examination: Supreme Court

By K Rajasekharan 3 June 2026Code of Criminal Procedures (CrPC)No Comments

While setting aside an order permitting the recall of a rape survivor for further cross-examination, the Supreme Court, in The State of Tripura v. Panna Ahmed [2026 INSC 584], observed that witnesses, particularly survivors of heinous crimes such as rape, should not be repeatedly subjected to the ordeal of cross-examination merely because of a change in defence counsel or an earlier oversight. The Court made this observation while considering the exercise of powers under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Courts and Advocates Must Exercise Caution in Frivolous POCSO Cases Arising from Matrimonial Disputes

By K Rajasekharan 31 May 2026POCSO CasesNo Comments

The Supreme Court, in Ishwar Chand Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2026 INSC 587], has cautioned that legal practitioners must not advise estranged spouses to file false matrimonial cases or frivolous complaints under the POCSO Act as a means to harass the opposite party or to secure favourable settlements in matrimonial and family disputes.