High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Katty Minoo Dastur & Anr. v. WMT Apparels Pvt. Ltd.

09 Dec 2025 · Madhav J. Jamdar

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.

civil petition_allowed Significant Order XLI Rule 5 CPC stay of execution eviction decree mesne profits

Janardhan Sitaram Surve & Ors. v. Sunil Ramesh Ukrulkar & Ors.

09 Dec 2025 · R. M. Joshi

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.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166 Section 165 negligence

Airport Authority of India v. Lite Bite Foods Private Limited

09 Dec 2025 · Somasekhar Sundaresan

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.

arbitration petition_dismissed Significant constructive res judicata Henderson Principle arbitration agreement abuse of process

M/s Rural Infrastructure Development Private Limited v. The Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer, Thane & Ors.

09 Dec 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

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.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 29A Arbitration Act State Highways Act arbitration Arbitral tribunal mandate expiry Substitution of arbitrator

M/s. Mumbai Nasik Express Way Limited v. Trambak Parbat Chavan

09 Dec 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

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.

civil appeal_allowed Significant National Highways Act, 1956 Section 3-D land acquisition vesting of property

Ambadas Shripati Jadhav and ors v. The State of Maharashtra and anr

09 Dec 2025 · Bharati Dangre; Shyam C. Chandak

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.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence identification parade Section 302 IPC murder

Nitinkumar Bhagawandas Mansata v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd

08 Dec 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

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.

administrative petition_dismissed Voluntary Separation Scheme Golden Gate Scheme 2009 delay in acceptance retirement benefits

Anheuser Busch Inbev India Ltd. v. Jagpin Brewerise Limited

08 Dec 2025 · ARIF S. DOCTOR
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off HAYWARDS 5000 COX 5001

Anheuser Busch Inbev India Ltd. v. Jagpin Brewerise Limited & Ors.

08 Dec 2025 · ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Registered trademark Numeral 5000

Bhavesh Suresh Kataria v. Kataria Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

08 Dec 2025 · Arif S. Doctor
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court granted interim injunction restraining the Defendant from using the mark "KATARIA INSURANCE," holding that the Plaintiff established a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off, and the Defendant's adoption was not bona fide.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trade Mark Infringement Passing Off Section 29 Trade Marks Act Section 35 Trade Marks Act

Christian Rajendran v. The State of Maharashtra

05 Dec 2025 · R. M. Joshi
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court upheld the conviction of one accused for sexual offences under POCSO Act based on reliable victim testimony and medical evidence, acquitted another accused for lack of proof, and modified sentence of a third accused for failure to report the offence.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant POCSO Act sexual assault victim testimony medical evidence

Khilji Mohsinahmed Mustakali v. Assistant Director

05 Dec 2025 · Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of bail in a money laundering case involving shell companies, holding that the applicant's acts of cheating and forgery tainted the proceeds as 'proceeds of crime' under PMLA.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant money laundering proceeds of crime shell companies cheating

The Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sudha Instant Soft Drinks and Essences

04 Dec 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that processed and canned pineapple products do not qualify as 'fresh fruits' under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and are liable to sales tax, overruling the Tribunal's exemption order.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 Entry A-23 fresh fruits sales tax exemption

New Shree Krishna SRA CHS v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Mumbai

04 Dec 2025 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti Sathe

The Bombay High Court directed the Slum Rehabilitation Authority to finalize the rehabilitation list without succumbing to illegal political interference, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory duties under the Slum Act.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Slum Rehabilitation Authority Annexure-II Slum rehabilitation scheme Extra-legal interference

Vasant Shenoy v. Sanjay Kumar

04 Dec 2025 · Madhav J. Jamdar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a certificate of sale issued by the Court in a public auction does not require mandatory registration under the Registration Act, and possession must be delivered upon payment of stamp duty.

civil appeal_allowed Significant certificate of sale registration act 1908 mandatory registration auction sale

Hany Babu v. National Investigation Agency

04 Dec 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court granted bail to the appellant accused under UAPA due to prolonged pretrial incarceration violating his constitutional right to a speedy trial, applying the principle of parity with co-accused and harmonizing statutory restrictions with Article 21 protections.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail prolonged incarceration speedy trial Article 21

Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust v. Niket Mehta

03 Dec 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court held that a suit against a Trustee of a public trust for recovery of compensation requires prior consent of the Charity Commissioner under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, and failure to obtain such consent mandates rejection of the suit plaint.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Section 50 MPT Act Section 51 MPT Act Charity Commissioner consent

Villa Realcon LLP v. Chandresh Parbat Gothi

03 Dec 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and directed reference of disputes arising under a 2019 MoU containing an arbitration clause to arbitration, holding that the presence of non-signatory parties in the suit does not preclude arbitration of disputes between parties bound by the arbitration agreement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration Act arbitration agreement cause of action segregation non-signatory parties

Sha Vijay Anandrao Sawant v. Baramati Nagar Parishad

03 Dec 2025 · Manish Pitale; Manjusha Deshpande
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that landowners deprived of land for public use must receive just and fair compensation under Article 300A, overruling municipal regulations providing nominal compensation and directing acquisition proceedings under the 2013 Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant Article 300A Right to property Just compensation Development Control Regulations

Chandrashekhar Bhimsen Naik v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

03 Dec 2025 · Bharati Dangre; Shyam C. Chandak
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held the petitioner's arrest illegal for failure to record specific individualized reasons and non-compliance with constitutional safeguards, ordering his release.

criminal petition_allowed Significant arrest procedure Section 35 BNSS Article 22 Constitution individualized reasons for arrest