High Court of Bombay
5,061 judgments
Nitin Nagarkar v. Income-tax Officer
The Bombay High Court held that a Tax Recovery Officer lacks jurisdiction to declare a property transfer void under Section 281 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, setting aside such an order passed without due procedure.
Shankar @ Bhagirath Bachaku Zha v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court modified the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, recognizing grave and sudden provocation as mitigating circumstance.
Vivek Gawde v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Bombay High Court held that framing of regulations under Section 105H MMC Act is discretionary and absence thereof does not invalidate eviction proceedings under Section 105B, directing the enquiry to proceed with adherence to natural justice.
Authorized Officer, I.D.B.I Bank Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court held that the District Magistrate's jurisdiction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is limited to assisting secured creditors in taking possession of secured assets and does not extend to adjudicating disputes or entertaining borrower objections, setting aside the impugned order that exceeded this scope.
Nikhilesh Kesarichand Jhaveri v. New Era Fabrics Limited
The court held that proforma defendants without adverse interest cannot lead evidence adverse to Plaintiffs in an eviction suit, setting aside the order permitting such evidence.
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Pune v. Kumar Builders Consortium
The Bombay High Court upheld the ITAT's order allowing pro rata deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act for eligible flats despite some flats exceeding the prescribed built-up area limit.
M/s. L.K.P. Merchant Financing Ltd. v. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court held that under amended Section 36(1)(vii), a bona fide write-off of bad debt in accounts suffices for tax deduction, allowing the appellant's claim despite accounting method or pending litigation.
Royston Xavier Parera v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for penetrative sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act and IPC, affirming the sufficiency of credible child testimony and medical evidence despite absence of injury.
Satyanarayana Rani v. National Investigation Agency & Ors.
The Bombay High Court allowed bail to a 72-year-old accused in an IED blast case, holding that the prosecution failed to prima facie establish his involvement and that continued incarceration would violate his fundamental rights.
Shivaji Ramchandra Tirlotkar v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a neighbor for penetrative sexual assault on a 5-year-old child under the POCSO Act, reduced the sentence from 15 to 10 years, and set aside redundant convictions under lesser POCSO offences.
Union of India v. Bobsons Corporation
The High Court upheld the Settlement Commission’s order refusing to reject the settlement application despite alleged incomplete disclosure, limiting its review to procedural legality under Article 226.
Sterlite Industries (India) Limited v. Special Director of Enforcement
The High Court held that once a contravention under FEMA is lawfully compounded and charges paid, no further adjudication proceedings can be continued, quashing the penalty order passed thereafter.
S.S. Kilaje v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that entertainment duty cannot be levied on billiard tables in private clubs used exclusively by members without public access or separate payment, quashing all such demand notices.
Kalpana Vijaysinh Savant v. Barkha Amir Haldive
The High Court held that a consenting party without any legal right or interest under the suit agreement is neither a necessary nor proper party and set aside the trial court's order allowing its impleadment in a suit for specific performance.
Kalpana Vijaysinh Savant v. Barkha Amir Haldive
The Bombay High Court held that a consenting party without legal right or interest in the suit property is neither a necessary nor proper party in a suit for specific performance and set aside the trial court's order allowing its impleadment.
Ramchandra Dev v. Joint Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur Division
The Bombay High Court quashed the Charity Commissioner's order rejecting the sale of trust land due to unsubstantiated valuation and directed acceptance of the highest tender exceeding the ready reckoner value.
Pundalik Sharanbasappa Patil v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that failure to initiate land acquisition proceedings within statutory timelines under Section 127 of the MRTP Act results in automatic lapse of reservation, and the landowner cannot be compelled to accept alternate acquisition modes without consent.
Amit Dholakia v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court directed authorities to promptly finalize and implement rules for installation of electric vehicle charging stations in cooperative housing societies, balancing environmental sustainability with statutory powers under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.
The State of Maharashtra v. Yeshwant Maruti Patil
The High Court held that promotion is not a fundamental right and a tribunal cannot direct the State to create promotional avenues absent recruitment rules providing for them, upholding the 2015 recruitment rules aligned with UGC Regulations mandating direct recruitment.
Popat Navasu Bendkoli v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court upheld the conviction under IPC and POCSO Act based on reliable victim testimony despite medical evidence showing no recent sexual assault.