High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

The Chief Administrative Officer, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran v. Shri Satish Gajanan Pradhan

10 Aug 2022 · Abhay Ahuja
Cites 1 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat to adjudicate a pension-related dispute as a public utility service matter under the Legal Services Authorities Act, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Permanent Lok Adalat Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 public utility service jurisdiction

Sole Proprietor of M/s Vikrant Developers v. Rashida Sadiqbhai Kalyanwalla

09 Aug 2022 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, held that arbitration commences on invocation notice, and referred disputes including impleading a subsequent transferee to arbitration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator commencement of arbitration proceedings invocation notice

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-14, Mumbai v. Shivshahi Punarvasan Prakalp Ltd

05 Aug 2022 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Abhay Ahuja
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The High Court held that prior to Explanation 2 to Section 263, mere inadequacy of inquiry by the Assessing Officer does not justify revision of assessment order, and upheld the Tribunal's decision dismissing the revenue's appeal against the allowance of deductions claimed by the assessee.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 263 Income Tax Act Revision of assessment order Inadequacy of inquiry Possible view

Firdous Mohammad Yunus Patel v. The State of Maharashtra

04 Aug 2022 · G.S. Patel; Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court held that disqualification for compassionate employment under Clause (E) applies only to children from the applicant's marriage with the deceased employee, allowing the petitioner to seek compassionate appointment despite the employee's children from a prior marriage.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Government Resolution 28 March 2001 Maharashtra Civil Services Rules 2005 small family definition

Arabian Jacking Enterprises For Contracting & Trading Company v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay

03 Aug 2022 · G.S. Patel; Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court upheld the arbitral award in favor of AJECT, ruling that the arbitrators correctly interpreted the price variation clause including both INR and foreign currency components, and that the award did not violate public policy or fundamental Indian law.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 price variation clause contract interpretation unjust enrichment

Smita Pansare & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

03 Aug 2022 · Revati Mohite Dere; Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The Bombay High Court transferred the investigation of Comrade Govind Pansare's murder from the SIT to the Maharashtra ATS due to lack of progress, directing cooperation to ensure effective investigation without disrupting the ongoing trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant transfer of investigation Special Investigating Team Anti-Terrorist Squad Comrade Govind Pansare murder

Karmayogi Shankarraoji Patil & Ors. v. Ruia & Ruia Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

03 Aug 2022 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court allowed the petitioners' appeal and directed closure of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act upon payment of interest and costs, holding that payment of cheque amount with interest justifies discharge even after issuance of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 Section 141 Section 143

Phoenix ARC Private Limited v. The State of Maharashtra

03 Aug 2022 · K. R. Shriram; A. S. Doctor
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that the Designated Authority under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has only ministerial jurisdiction to assist secured creditors in taking possession and cannot adjudicate disputes or entertain third party objections, setting aside an order that delayed possession pending tenancy disputes.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 14 Designated Authority jurisdiction secured creditor

Anil Ramesh Kolhe v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

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

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a man for raping a mentally retarded woman but reduced his sentence from life imprisonment to 10 years rigorous imprisonment, emphasizing the victim's incapacity to consent and the need for proportional sentencing.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant rape mental retardation Section 376(2)(l) IPC consent

Santosh Prakash Gurav v. State of Maharashtra

02 Aug 2022 · Sarang V. Kotwal

The Bombay High Court acquitted three appellants in a robbery case due to doubtful identification, unreliable recovery, and uncorroborated retracted confessions, emphasizing the need for corroboration in criminal convictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant retracted confession test identification parade Section 164 CrPC identification evidence

Waman Ganpatrao Kadam v. The State of Maharashtra

02 Aug 2022 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that undisputed project-affected persons must be allotted rehabilitation land without undue delay, setting aside cancellation orders made without natural justice and directing the State to allot alternate lands within six months.

property petition_allowed Significant rehabilitation land allotment Koyna Project natural justice Article 300A

Go Digit General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Reshma Shankar Pawar

01 Aug 2022 · Shivkumar Dige

The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal's finding of sole negligence of a stationary truck driver causing a fatal accident and affirmed the compensation awarded based on notional income.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim negligence stationary vehicle parking lights

M/s. Lashkaria Housing & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority

01 Aug 2022 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld the termination of a developer's appointment under Section 13(2) of the Maharashtra Slum Act for deliberate delay in implementing a slum rehabilitation scheme, rejecting the petitioner's locus and substantive challenges.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 13(2) Maharashtra Slum Act termination of developer Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Slum Rehabilitation Authority

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-28 v. Crescent Construction Co.

29 Jul 2022 · DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR; ABHAY AHUJA

The Bombay High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal holding that the retrospective amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 protects the assessee from disallowance if TDS is deposited before the return filing due date.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 40(a)(ia) Income Tax Act, 1961 Tax Deducted at Source Retrospective amendment

Manohar Sahadev Parab v. The State of Maharashtra

29 Jul 2022 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a Talathi for demanding and accepting bribe, relying on credible independent panch witness testimony and recovery of marked currency notes despite the complainant's death before trial.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act bribery demand and acceptance of bribe independent panch witness

Insight Diagnostic Oncological & Research Institute Private Limited v. Union of India

28 Jul 2022 · K.R. Shriram; A.S. Doctor
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that interest under Section 28AB of the Customs Act cannot be demanded retrospectively for imports made before its enactment and quashed the demand for interest on delayed customs duty payment.

tax petition_allowed Significant Customs Act 1962 Section 28AB Interest on delayed payment Retrospective application

Manu Babu Patel v. Prakash Mohanlal Desai & Ors.

28 Jul 2022 · Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal restoring the suit, holding that statutory bar under Section 12F of Regulation 1962 does not apply where fundamental judicial procedures were violated and rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was improper.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Section 12F Regulation 1962 bar of jurisdiction res judicata

Prakash Bharat Aware and Vaibhav @ Bhau Ankush Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra

27 Jul 2022 · A. S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of three appellants for gang rape under Section 376D IPC and SCST Act, affirming the prosecutrix's credible testimony despite defence allegations of false implication.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant gang rape prosecutrix testimony Section 376D IPC SCST Act

Uttam Energy Ltd. v. M/s. Shivratna Udyog Ltd.

27 Jul 2022 · G.S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that it has exclusive jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint arbitrators, and this jurisdiction is not ousted by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Commercial Courts Act 2015 jurisdiction to appoint arbitrator High Court jurisdiction

Union of India v. National Commission for Scheduled Castes

27 Jul 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes lacks jurisdiction to interfere with employer disciplinary actions of compulsory retirement that have attained finality, quashing the Commission's order recommending reinvestigation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant National Commission for Scheduled Castes compulsory retirement disciplinary action jurisdiction