High Court of Bombay
5,131 judgments
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Kalpita Enclave Co-operative Housing Society
The Bombay High Court allowed the Municipal Corporation's appeal directing removal of unauthorized structures obstructing a public DP road, rejecting Plaintiffs' demand for uniform 13.40 meters road width completion before opening the road.
Irwin Edmund Sequeira & Ors. v. Sale Proceeds of MV Karnika
The Bombay High Court allowed a mortgagee's intervention in an Admiralty suit under Rule 1086, holding that intervention depends solely on interest in the vessel or sale proceeds and that scope of defences is to be adjudicated at trial.
Federal Express Corporation v. Fedex Securities Private Ltd. & Ors.
The Bombay High Court granted interim injunction restraining defendants from using the mark FEDEX, holding that their use infringed the plaintiff's registered and well-known trademark despite defendants' reliance on Section 159(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Deputy Collector v. M/s. Vasinaka Sahakari Mandal
The Bombay High Court held that the Reference Court under the Land Acquisition Act has jurisdiction to determine the relevant notification date for compensation calculation, rejecting the acquiring body's preliminary objection.
M/s. Ramnarain Sons Pvt Ltd v. The Board of Mumbai Port Authority
The Bombay High Court held that eviction suits instituted before appointment of the Estate Officer under the PPE Act retain jurisdiction in the original court despite subsequent transfers, dismissing the petition challenging Small Causes Court jurisdiction.
Shri Pundlik Dagu Holgade & Ors. v. Shri Pandurang Kashinath Hire & Ors.
The court held that a clear sale deed with a condition to repurchase, lacking debtor-creditor relationship, is not a mortgage by conditional sale, and the right to repurchase extinguished after the stipulated period.
Afsana Enterprises v. The Assistant Municipal Commissioner and Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed appeals challenging eviction notices on unauthorized structures on court-controlled land, holding the suits frivolous and an abuse of process, and upheld removal of encroachments with exemplary costs imposed.
Erle Benedict Pereira v. Erlyn Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Ltd
The Bombay High Court upheld the Plaintiff's right to 900 sq.ft. additional FSI reserved in a 1994 Deed of Conveyance against the Society, granting interim relief restraining redevelopment without honoring this entitlement.
Arrow Business Development Consultants Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Bank of India & Ors.
The Court held that ownership of a secured asset under SARFAESI Act transfers only upon issuance of the sale certificate, and an interim moratorium under IBC precludes possession transfer before such issuance.
Thermax Limited v. Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd.
The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award holding the purchaser responsible for GTG breakdown due to improper maintenance and barred consequential damages claims under contract exclusion clauses.
Lokranjan Breweries Private Limited & Anr v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that licence fees for country liquor manufacture must be charged uniformly at a flat rate per case based on overall production, striking down arbitrary slab-wise differential treatment violating Article 14.
Katty Minoo Dastur & Anr. v. WMT Apparels Pvt. Ltd.
The High Court quashed the Appellate Court's order imposing onerous retrospective compensation conditions for stay of eviction, affirming that tenancy terminates on the eviction decree date and stay conditions must be reasonable under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC.
Janardhan Sitaram Surve & Ors. v. Sunil Ramesh Ukrulkar & Ors.
The High Court upheld the dismissal of a motor accident claim petition for compensation due to lack of proof of negligence by the driver of the offending vehicle under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Airport Authority of India v. Lite Bite Foods Private Limited
The Bombay High Court dismissed the arbitration petition seeking fresh reference on interest claims already adjudicated, applying the Henderson Principle and constructive res judicata to uphold finality of arbitral awards.
M/s Rural Infrastructure Development Private Limited v. The Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer, Thane & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the mandate of an arbitral tribunal under the Maharashtra State Highways Act expires under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act if arbitration is not completed timely, and the territorial court of the seat of arbitration has jurisdiction to substitute the arbitrator.
M/s. Mumbai Nasik Express Way Limited v. Trambak Parbat Chavan
The Bombay High Court held that upon publication of Section 3-D notification under the National Highways Act, 1956, the acquired land vests absolutely in the Central Government extinguishing the original owner's rights, thereby negating claims for possession or compensation under a lease agreement.
Ambadas Shripati Jadhav and ors v. The State of Maharashtra and anr
The Bombay High Court set aside the murder convictions of four accused due to failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on unreliable circumstantial evidence and identification.
Nitinkumar Bhagawandas Mansata v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd
The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition challenging delay in acceptance of voluntary separation under the Golden Gate Scheme, holding that absence of prescribed timelines and acceptance of benefits preclude relief.
Anheuser Busch Inbev India Ltd. v. Jagpin Brewerise Limited
The Bombay High Court held that the Defendant’s use of the mark 'COX 5001' infringed the Plaintiff’s registered trademarks 'HAYWARDS 5000' and 'FIVE THOUSAND' and constituted passing off, granting permanent injunction and costs to the Plaintiff.
Anheuser Busch Inbev India Ltd. v. Jagpin Brewerise Limited & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the Defendants infringed the Plaintiff's registered trademarks 'HAYWARDS 5000' and 'FIVE THOUSAND' by using the mark 'COX 5000' for beer, granted permanent injunction and costs, and rejected Defendants' defenses for lack of evidence.