High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Subhash Mahadev Desai

26 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court set aside the Labour Court's award reinstating a dismissed employee due to a 13-year delay in raising the industrial dispute, holding that unreasonable delay and laches are fatal to such claims under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 10 delay in raising industrial dispute reinstatement

Sharekhan Limited v. Monita Kisan Khade & Ors.

22 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

Bombay High Court held that failure to maintain SEBI-mandated pre-trade confirmations does not automatically entitle clients to recover losses from stockbrokers, setting aside arbitral awards that awarded damages without proof of actual loss.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SEBI Circular 22 March 2018 stockbroker liability pre-trade confirmation authorized person

The Gadhinglaj Urban Co-operative Bank v. Pooja Ravikumar Nidasoshi & Ors.

21 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a civil suit challenging SARFAESI Act auction proceedings is barred under Section 34 unless fraud is specifically pleaded, restoring the Trial Court's order rejecting the plaint.

civil appeal_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 34 Order 7 Rule 11 CPC bar of jurisdiction

BOSCH LIMITED v. BOSCH EMPLOYEES UNION

14 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court modified a Labour Court award reinstating dismissed workers by directing lump sum compensation in lieu of reinstatement due to proved misconduct balanced against victimisation and long delay.

labor petition_allowed Significant industrial dispute victimisation dismissal reinstatement

Shyamalendu Kumar Das v. Union of India

09 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court upheld interception orders under Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act in a corruption case, holding that succinct reasons recording public safety and necessity suffice and that such orders are judicially reviewable but entitled to deference.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 Section 5(2) interception of telephonic messages public emergency

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. CA Gordhanbhai Madhabhai Savalia

07 Mar 2018 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale · 25th Gaikwad RD 2023:BHC-OS:12765-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the Institute's disciplinary reference against a Chartered Accountant due to inordinate delay, lack of independent findings, and acquittal in criminal trial, emphasizing the need for expeditious and reasoned proceedings.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings inordinate delay professional misconduct Chartered Accountants Act, 1949

Harshit Harish Jain & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

03 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that the limitation period for refund of stamp duty runs from the date of registration of the cancellation deed, applying the amended Stamp Act provisions, and dismissed the petition challenging the refund rejection.

civil petition_dismissed Significant refund of stamp duty Maharashtra Stamp Act Section 48(1) Section 47 Registration Act

Subhash Pandurang Bandiwadekar v. The State of Maharashtra

01 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

Rejection of Change Reports does not automatically invalidate membership unless specifically adjudicated, and Election Officer cannot exclude members from election voters list without proper enquiry into membership validity.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act Change Reports membership validity Election Officer jurisdiction

Desai Hospitals Ventures LLP & Anr v. DHI Global Holdings Ltd. & Ors.

01 Mar 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed Plaintiffs' interim injunction against termination of a franchise agreement, holding that fraudulent underreporting of sales justified termination and precluded specific performance.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Master Franchise Agreement termination notice underreporting of sales royalty payment

Jayashree Chandrakant Dhavre v. Union of India

28 Feb 2018 · Nitin Jamdar; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court directed payment of the final reward to the legal heir of a deceased informer, holding that belated doubts about identity cannot justify arbitrary withholding of rewards already partially disbursed.

administrative petition_allowed Significant reward to informer Customs Act, 1962 Circular No. 20/2015 interim reward

Satara District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra

26 Feb 2018 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court set aside the order cancelling recruitment of 385 cooperative bank employees, holding that cancellation without hearing appointees and without concrete proof of irregularity violates natural justice and is unsustainable after six years of service.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Cooperative Bank recruitment Cancellation of appointments Principles of natural justice Jurisdiction of Additional Chief Secretary

B.V. Jewels v. Union of India

23 Feb 2018 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain · 2024:BHC-OS:18485-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the statutory interest demand and sealing of factory premises, holding the petitioner failed to comply fully with the Supreme Court's order and the interest liability arises automatically under the Customs Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 28AA interest on delayed payment CESTAT order

Usha Kakade v. Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd.

22 Feb 2018 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Appeals against orders in enforcement proceedings under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are not maintainable under the Commercial Courts Act or CPC, and the maintainability issue is conclusively settled by res judicata.

commercial appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 36 ACA Section 37 ACA Commercial Courts Act, 2015

Hiraman Yashwant Kathe & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

14 Feb 2018 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that disputes over compensation fixed by agreement under Section 33(2) of the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act cannot be referred under Section 34, and the 2013 Act applies only to compensation determined unilaterally by the Collector.

property petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 Section 33 Section 34 land acquisition

Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. State of Maharashtra

09 Feb 2018 · Nitin Jamdar; M. M. Sathaye
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Bombay High Court directed Maharashtra to comply with Supreme Court mandates and statutory obligations under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, ensuring effective child protection through proper staffing, functioning, and monitoring of all related authorities and institutions.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Juvenile Justice Act 2015 State Commission for Protection of Child Rights Juvenile Justice Board Child Welfare Committee

Girish Sahakari Griharachana Sanstha Maryadit v. Mallikarjun Madhavrao Navande

12 Jan 2018 · Amit Borkar

The court held that refusal of membership in a co-operative society must be based on statutory or bye-law grounds and cannot be justified by alleged unauthorized construction, breach of land use conditions, or contractual clauses absent express statutory disqualification.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act Section 23 membership admission unauthorized construction

Yedage Vishnu Baba v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

09 Jan 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that the Minister exceeded jurisdiction by reviewing his own order without new evidence or error apparent on record, setting aside the review order and upholding the original restoration of licenses.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant power of review Rule 16 Maharashtra Essential Commodities Rules error apparent on face of record revision vs review

Dhananjay Shivram Mapare and Ors. v. Vilas Eknath Kapre and Ors.

22 Dec 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court allowed the revision to reject a vexatious suit filed to challenge a final partition decree, holding that no real cause of action existed and the plaint was liable to be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action vexatious litigation fraud

Nishant Karsan Bhagat v. The City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.

15 Dec 2017 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; G. S. Kulkarni, J.
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Court upheld CIDCO's authority to allot lands prior to publication of the NMMC's Draft Development Plan and dismissed petitions challenging such allotments and State Government directives protecting them.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 New Town Development Authority CIDCO Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation

Vitthalrao Shinde Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra

13 Dec 2017 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court remanded the issue of EMI deduction for determining sugarcane revenue sharing price for 2016-2017 to the statutory Board for fresh consideration in light of subsequent policy developments.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Revenue Sharing Price Equated Monthly Installments Sugarcane Price Regulation Maharashtra Regulation of Sugarcane Price Act 2013