High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

XYZ v. The Union of India

14 Mar 2023 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that the Central Government's 2023 notification prohibiting donor gametes in surrogacy is contrary to the Surrogacy Act and unconstitutional as applied to petitioners with medical necessity, allowing them to proceed with surrogacy without complying with that condition.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 Surrogacy (Regulation) Rules, 2022 donor gametes gestational surrogacy

The Principal Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai East Commissionerate v. The Securities and Exchange Board of India

13 Mar 2023 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Valmiki Sa Menezes

The Bombay High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the CESTAT's finding that extended limitation for service tax demand could not be invoked without evidence of wilful suppression or fraud by SEBI.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant service tax extended period of limitation wilful suppression sovereign function

MRK Enterprises v. Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority & Ors.

13 Mar 2023 · S. V. Gangapurwala, ACJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J.

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing issuance of occupancy certificate without requiring revised CRZ clearance, applying paragraph 8(V)(c)(2)(i) of CRZ Notification 2011 to ongoing redevelopment projects with prior development permission under DCR 1991.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 1991 Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 2011 Development Control Regulations 1967 Development Control Regulations 1991

Karanja Terminal & Logistics Pvt Ltd v. Sahara Dredging Ltd

13 Mar 2023 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral interim order directing security for an admitted claim, emphasizing limited judicial interference in discretionary arbitral interim relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 17 Arbitration Act interim security reconciliation statement Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC

Union of India v. Chandrakant Sakharam Joshi

13 Mar 2023 · S. V. Gangapurwala, ACJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal's order setting aside the removal penalty due to cumulative procedural violations including failure to conduct mandatory general examination under Rule 9(21), ordering reinstatement without back wages.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant departmental inquiry Vigilance Manual paragraphs 704 and 705 Rule 9(21) Railway Services Rules Inquiry Officer as presenting officer

Niloufer Soli Lam v. Zarir Pesi Bharucha

13 Mar 2023 · Sunil B. Shukre; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that matrimonial disputes relating to property fall exclusively within the Family Court's jurisdiction under the Family Courts Act, 1984, and transferred the suit filed in the High Court to the Family Court.

family appeal_allowed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 jurisdiction matrimonial dispute property dispute

Kokuyo Camlin Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra

13 Mar 2023 · G. S. Kulkarni; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that challenges to municipal tax assessment orders must be pursued through the statutory appeal under Section 406 of the MMC Act, dismissing writ petitions filed by Kokuyo Camlin Ltd. and keeping open the vires challenge to Section 152D.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Local Body Tax Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act Section 406 appeal Section 152D liability

M/s.R.N. Ghanekar & Co. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

10 Mar 2023 · K. R. Shriram; Rajesh S. Patil
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The court held that arbitration claims must be initiated within three years from the accrual of cause of action, and invocation of a pre-arbitration dispute resolution clause is not a pre-condition for arbitration, dismissing the appellant's claim as barred by limitation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration limitation General Conditions of Contract Clause 96

Arvind Gopalrao Basutkar & Ors v. Registrar General & Ors

10 Mar 2023 · G. S. Patel; Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that pay scale benefits granted to Original Side officers must be extended to similarly placed Appellate Side officers to uphold equality under Article 14, directing immediate implementation of parity in service conditions.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Article 14 pay scale parity Selection Grade Super Time Scale

Universal Cables Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

10 Mar 2023 · S. V. Gangapurwala; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld CIDCO's decision to hold BNC technically qualified in a tender for underground cable works, emphasizing judicial restraint in tender matters and rejecting petitioners' challenge of arbitrariness and procedural irregularities.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender process technical qualification judicial review arbitrariness

Jagdish Sajjankumar Banka v. The State of Maharashtra

10 Mar 2023 · A. S. Gadkari; Prakash D. Naik
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed anticipatory bail to appellants in a SC/ST Act case, holding that the bar under Section 18 applies only if a prima facie case is made out and that malafide or motivated complaints do not attract the bar.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 18 SC/ST Act prima facie case malafide complaint

The Barshi Bar Association v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

09 Mar 2023 · S.V. Gangapurwala; S.V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that compromise decrees partitioning agricultural land are not compulsorily registrable and attract only nominal stamp duty under Maharashtra law, invalidating the Collector's Circular insisting otherwise.

civil appeal_allowed Significant compromise decree partition of agricultural land registration Act 1908 stamp duty

Noshir Darabshaw Talati v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

08 Mar 2023 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment based on a mere change of opinion without new tangible material is invalid and quashed the reassessment notice and order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 notice Reopening of assessment Change of opinion

Framji Dinshaw Petit Parsee Sanatorium v. Income Tax Officer and Ors.

08 Mar 2023 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment under section 148 without fresh tangible material is impermissible and upheld the petitioner charitable trust's right to carry forward and set off deficit, quashing the reassessment notice and order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Reassessment Charitable Trust

Angsley Investments Limited v. Jupiter Denizcilik Tasimacilik Mumessillik San. Ve Ticaret Limited Sirketi

08 Mar 2023 · K. R. Shriram; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that admiralty jurisdiction requires vessels to be parties and within territorial jurisdiction for arrest, disallowed injunctions against non-parties, and set aside decree against appellant for lack of jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Admiralty jurisdiction action in rem action in personam arrest of vessel

Ravindra Shivram Salvi v. The State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2023 · A.S. Gadkari; Prakash D. Naik

The Bombay High Court upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's arms licence under Section 17(3)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, holding that the licensing authority's subjective satisfaction based on criminal cases registered against the petitioner justified the revocation to maintain public peace.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Arms Act, 1959 arms licence cancellation Section 17(3)(b) public peace

Lyka Labs Limited & Anr. v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

08 Mar 2023 · Amit Borkar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that an authorized signatory of a company is not the 'drawer' under the Negotiable Instruments Act and cannot be directed to pay interim compensation under section 143A, which applies solely to the drawer (the company).

criminal other Significant Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Section 143A Section 148

Anil Purshottam Sharma v. Monica Jignesh Parekh

08 Mar 2023 · Shivkumar Dige

The High Court held the truck driver solely negligent for a night-time expressway accident due to improper parking without hazard signals, reduced excessive compensation awarded by the Tribunal, and enhanced the claimants' compensation accordingly.

civil appeal_partly_allowed Significant motor accident claim negligence contributory negligence parking regulations

Man Global Ltd v. Ram Prakash Joukani; Man Global Ltd v. Bharat Prakash Joukani

06 Mar 2023 · G. S. Patel; Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that appeals under Section 58 of RERA lie against any decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal, not only final orders, overruling prior contrary precedent.

civil other Significant Section 58 RERA Appeal against interlocutory order Pre-deposit order Section 100 CPC