High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:
Showing 2022 — 663 judgments found

Steel Plant Private Limited v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

07 Sep 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that the Municipal Corporation lacked jurisdiction to take possession of petitioners' land under section 299 of the MMC Act due to absence of an existing prescribed public street line, quashing the possession notices.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Section 297(1)(b) Section 299 public street definition

C R Menon v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation

06 Sep 2022 · GS Patel; Gauri Godse
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards that disregarded the fixed rate contract terms and rejected an undisputed counter claim, holding that courts can quash but not modify arbitration awards under the Arbitration Act, 1996.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Section 37 patent illegality

Kushal @ Akash Dattatray Prabhu v. The State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2022 · A.S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence including last seen theory, scientific proof, and recovery of incriminating articles.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen together theory Section 302 IPC ransom call

Sheshmani Magdum Pal v. State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2022 · A.S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for the murder of his wife and two minor sons based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC Section 201 IPC

Sidram Baccharam Kamble v. The State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2022 · A.S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence and the last seen together theory, affirming the sufficiency of the prosecution's chain of evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen together theory Section 302 IPC Section 309 IPC

Mahadeo Rama Madhvi & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra

06 Sep 2022 · A. S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the murder convictions of accused Nos. 1, 2, and 4 based on reliable ocular and forensic evidence while acquitting others for lack of specific proof.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant murder ocular evidence recovery evidence blood-stained clothes

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Shri Bharat Krishnalal Thakkar

06 Sep 2022 · S. M. Modak
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed BPCL's appeal, holding that the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain eviction on lease expiry without renewal under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, excluding applicability of Maharashtra Rent Control Act to BPCL.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant eviction lease expiry Transfer of Property Act Section 106

Ganpat Baburao Boraste v. Vinayak Pandurang Waghmare

05 Sep 2022 · Sandeep K. Shinde

The High Court set aside the Trial Court's order allowing amendment of the plaint introducing a barred cause of action regarding tenancy rights bequeathed by Will, holding such amendment impermissible and unnecessary for deciding the suit on adverse possession.

civil petition_allowed Significant amendment of plaint cause of action limitation res judicata

Seema Wd/o Sanjay Pathare; Neha D/o Sanjay Pathare v. Union of India

05 Sep 2022 · Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to the dependents of a deceased railway employee, holding that death occurred in an untoward incident under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, rejecting the Railway's claim of unauthorized track crossing.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Section 124-A untoward incident bonafide passenger

Ramesh Vasantrao Patil v. The State of Maharashtra

05 Sep 2022 · G. S. Kulkarni; Arif S. Doctor
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court upheld the disqualification of a Gram Panchayat member under Section 14(1)(d) following removal under Section 39(1), affirming that interim stay of appellate orders does not negate statutory disqualification.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disqualification Section 14(1)(d) Section 39(1) Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959

Procter and Gamble Home Products Private Limited v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

02 Sep 2022 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that the ITAT exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act by revisiting the classification of income already pending before the High Court, and set aside the impugned order accordingly.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Section 254(2) Income Tax Act jurisdictional limit income classification

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd v. Anil Jayram Ghag

30 Aug 2022 · Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court upheld interim compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, ruling that no-fault liability applies once a policy is produced unless proven fake, and such summary findings do not bar defenses in later proceedings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 140 No fault liability Interim compensation

Arun Sambhaji Khanvilkar v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Aug 2022 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court acquitted police officers accused of corruption due to failure of prosecution to prove demand of bribe with independent corroboration and non-production of electronic evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 demand of illegal gratification accomplice testimony corroboration

Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Anr. v. Joint Commissioner of Sales

30 Aug 2022 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J; N. J. Jamadar, J

The Bombay High Court held that secured creditors under the SARFAESI and RDDB Acts do not have a statutory first charge overriding State tax dues, and priority in payment under the 2016 amendments does not displace the State's first charge.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act RDDB Act priority of secured creditors first charge

Union Bank of India v. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax

30 Aug 2022 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that a secured creditor with registered charge under the SARFAESI Act has priority over the State Government’s sales tax attachment, quashing the attachment order and allowing recovery from secured assets.

civil petition_allowed Significant secured creditor SARFAESI Act CERSAI registration priority of charge

Jalaram Fabrics v. Nisarg Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

30 Aug 2022 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award under institutional arbitration rules, rejecting the petitioner’s challenge based on unilateral appointment and jurisdictional objections.

civil petition_dismissed Significant institutional arbitration unilateral appointment arbitral award arbitration agreement

Nandiwadekar v. The State of Maharashtra

29 Aug 2022 · M.G. Sewlikar; R.D. Dhanuka

The Bombay High Court held that State Government's permission under Section 257(1) MLR Code to initiate revision after 55 years is an administrative act not requiring personal hearing or reasons, subject to jurisdictional judicial review, while merits of revision lie with revisional authority.

administrative other Significant Maharashtra Land Revenue Code Section 257 revision application administrative order

Ibarat Husain Kitabullah v. The State of Maharashtra

29 Aug 2022 · A.S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for murder and related offences based on strong circumstantial evidence and credible eyewitness identification.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder attempt to murder identification parade

Vaishali Baban Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra

29 Aug 2022 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.

The Bombay High Court held that the Scrutiny Committee must provide all enquiry reports and reasons for re-enquiry to the applicant before invalidating a Scheduled Tribe claim, and directed a fresh verification adhering to principles of natural justice.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Vigilance Cell Re-enquiry

Walter Bau AG v Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

26 Aug 2022 · G. S. Patel; Gauri Godse
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that ratification of an initial dispute reference validates arbitration proceedings despite challenges on authorization and succession grounds, setting aside the order that annulled arbitral awards.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Disputes Review Board arbitration authorization ratification