High Court of Bombay
5,061 judgments
CREDAI-BANM v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking extension of tax deduction timelines under section 80-IBA of the Income Tax Act, holding that courts cannot direct the legislature to amend tax laws and that no discrimination under Article 14 was established.
Rusabh Shah v. Avarsekar & Sons Private Limited
The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing registration of a co-operative housing society, holding that the Competent Authority must verify the validity of the promoter's submission under the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act before rejecting society registration.
Riyazuddin Hisamuddin Kazi v. National Investigating Agency
The Bombay High Court allowed bail to the appellant charged under Sections 120-B and 201 IPC, holding that absence of prima facie evidence of knowledge or participation in destruction of evidence and no UAPA charges entitled him to bail.
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd v. MAD (India) Pvt. Ltd
The Bombay High Court held that an arbitration clause printed on the back of tax invoices, accepted and acted upon by the parties, constitutes a valid arbitration agreement warranting appointment of a sole arbitrator.
Namrata Avinash Kadu v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.
The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order for failure to place the anticipatory bail order before the detaining authority and supply it to the detenu, violating Article 22(5) rights and vitiating subjective satisfaction.
State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Prabhakar Rangnath Kulkarni and Ors.
The High Court held that Civil Courts have jurisdiction to entertain suits challenging land acquisition where mandatory procedural requirements under the special resettlement statute are not complied with, and dismissed the revision application against the Trial Court's order upholding such jurisdiction.
IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Namrata Namdeo Vishe & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal, holding that insurers must indemnify third-party victims despite invalid driver licenses but may recover the amount from the insured under the 'pay and recover' doctrine.
Hyprecision Hydraulik v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that failure to produce a declaration certified by the Octroi Inspector is a procedural lapse that does not bar refund of octroi under Section 194(2) of the MMC Act if substantive eligibility criteria are met.
Anil Vishnu Anturkar v. Chandrakumar Popatlal Baldota
The Bombay High Court held that a lawyer cannot be compelled to disclose or verify privileged professional communications without the client's express consent, even after the client's death, quashing the witness summons issued for such purpose.
Metro Ortem Ltd v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation
The Bombay High Court held that service of writ of summons is mandatory and appearance through advocate does not dispense with it, dismissing the petition challenging the trial court’s order permitting late filing of written statement without proper service.
Shri Babasaheb Bapurao Jarande and ors. v. Smt. Sonabai Ankush Kolate through legal heirs and ors.
The High Court allowed the petitioners' writ under Article 227 to direct scientific examination of the thumb impression on a disputed Will, holding such investigation necessary and expedient in the interests of justice under Order XXVI Rule 10A CPC and Section 45 Evidence Act.
Mahadeo @ Nana Gundiba Khandale v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a man for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act and IPC, affirming the reliability of the victim's testimony and supporting medical evidence.
Si2 Microsystems Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Bank of Baroda & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the confirmation of auction sale of mortgaged property, holding that a confirmed sale cannot be set aside merely on a subsequent higher offer absent fraud, and statutory remedies must be exhausted.
Jitendra Velji Faria and Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Trial Court's refusal to allow Plaintiffs to recall witnesses or amend pleadings belatedly after closure of evidence, holding such attempts as abuse of process and emphasizing expeditious trial.
Alam Adam Mansuri v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant due to failure of the prosecution to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the necessity of a proper test identification parade and credible incriminating evidence.
Bank of India v. Magnifico Minerals Private Limited & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the Bank of India's application for condonation of a 579-day delay in filing a commercial appeal, emphasizing that public sector banks must exercise due diligence and that delay condonation in commercial matters is an exception, not a rule.
Haribhau Narayan Chikane v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act due to failure to take possession and pay compensation, quashing the award and releasing the petitioner’s land from acquisition.
Bharatiya Bhavan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Krishna Harinarayan Bajaj
The Bombay High Court held that a co-operative society's negligence in maintaining common property entitles a member to recover certified repair costs with interest, but damages for loss to movable property require proper proof.
The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Thane v. Ajit India Private Limited
The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal under section 35G of the Central Excise Act on maintainability grounds, holding that classification issues involving rate of duty fall within the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under section 35L.
Vijay Laxman Bhawe and Ors. v. P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the Trial Court's order restoring a suit dismissed for non-prosecution, holding that an assignee under an agreement for sale is a proper party entitled to continue the suit and that the delay in filing restoration application was rightly condoned.