High Court of Bombay
5,131 judgments
Pritam Vijay Anuse & Ors. v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that cancellation of admissions of students to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya during the Covid-19 pandemic on hyper-technical grounds was unjustified and directed their admission to be reinstated, affirming the right to education under the RTE Act.
State of Maharashtra v. Raghunath Dnyandev Katkar
The High Court set aside the acquittal of a police officer under the Prevention of Corruption Act, holding that acceptance of illegal gratification for doing an official act is punishable and appellate courts may interfere with acquittals based on improper appreciation of evidence.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Mrunal Makarand Patwardhan
The Bombay High Court held that a burst tyre causing a motor accident is not an act of God but negligence, upheld the compensation award with minor reduction, and clarified principles for assessing deceased's income and compensation.
Satardekar and ors v. Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr.
The court held that a contract induced by misrepresentation as to the contracting party is voidable, refused specific performance due to absence of privity and misrepresentation, but ordered refund of consideration with interest.
Chidanand Ogyappa Yammi & Ors. v. Girish Sahakari Samudaik Krishi Sangh & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that exemption under Section 43A of the Bombay Tenancy Act can only be granted by State Government notification, quashing the MRT order that relied on a non-existent exemption certificate issued by the District Deputy Registrar.
Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni v. The Maharashtra Public Service Commission
The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of a candidate's request to change her application category post-examination based on a corrigendum relaxing certificate validity, affirming that category changes after application submission are impermissible.
M. L. Sandbhor v. Sulochana Walimbe & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the appellate court's order rejecting a belated counter claim filed after amendment and framing of issues on limitation grounds in a cooperative society dispute.
Abdul Aziz Bharmar & Anr. v. Vinod Anand & Ors.
The Court held that utilization of TDR generated from suit land on adjoining land does not confer ownership rights in the adjoining land or flats constructed thereon, and the adjoining landowner cannot be impleaded as a party in the suit concerning the suit land.
D.K. Realty India Private Limited v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment without new material, after the issue was examined in the original scrutiny assessment, amounts to an impermissible change of opinion and quashed the reassessment notice.
Lok Developers v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment notices under section 148 must be served on the primary or updated email ID as per the last filed return, and service on a secondary email ID alone vitiates the proceedings.
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court upheld the IPAB's order cancelling the petitioner's trademark registration for "OFLOMAC" due to deceptive similarity with respondent's earlier mark "OFRAMAX" in pharmaceutical products.
Sangharsh Alias Bhavya Nitin Adsul v. The Commissioner of Police Pune City
The Bombay High Court set aside a detention order due to unconstitutional delay in considering the petitioner's representation, affirming the requirement of expeditious disposal under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Eskay Hospitality Services India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Sterling Hospitality
The Bombay High Court held that a suit by an unregistered partnership firm to enforce contractual rights arising from its core business is barred under Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and accordingly allowed the writ petition to reject the plaint.
Sunita Vilas Gavali & Ors. v. Balwant Shankar Gadave & Ors.
The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act requires recovery efforts for unpaid purchase price before declaring a tenant-purchaser's acquisition ineffective, and failure to initiate such recovery invalidates eviction proceedings.
Gopal Ganpat Patil v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding concurrent findings that the petitioner failed to prove lawful possession and tenancy rights on tillers day under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
State of Maharashtra v. Mayavati Ramchandra Sawant & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing regularisation of Badli workers based on a final Industrial Court adjudication of unfair labour practice, clarifying that the Umadevi judgment does not bar such relief.
Neena B. Rangnekar v. Sharadashram Vidyamandir Trust
The Bombay High Court held that retrenchment claims under Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act fall within the Industrial Court's jurisdiction, not the Labour Court's exclusive domain over termination claims under Item 1, and remanded the matter for merits adjudication.
M/s. Lifeline Medical & General Stores Chemist and Drugs v. Assistant Municipal Commissioner Food & Drugs Administration & Licensing Authority, Maharashtra State
The Bombay High Court quashed the cancellation and suspension orders of a drug license for procedural lapses and accepted the petitioner's undertaking, allowing resumption of business.
Latif Yusuf Manikkoth v. Bank of Baroda
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition by a guarantor challenging SARFAESI recovery proceedings, holding that statutory remedies under SARFAESI and DRT Acts preclude writ jurisdiction and that the MSMED Act does not override SARFAESI protections.
Vidyadhar Gajanan Mote & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that under Section 19-B of the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955, the Land Acquisition Officer can determine compensation without mandatory prior negotiation attempts by the State Government, and challenges to such awards must be pursued via statutory arbitration, not writ petitions.