High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Bank of Baroda v. Shri Shashikant Pitale & Ors.

07 Apr 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that illegal termination of daily wage workers does not mandate reinstatement or regularisation absent sanctioned posts, directing lump-sum compensation instead.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25F illegal termination reinstatement

Isha Exim v. Union of India

31 Mar 2017 · G.S. Kulkarni; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that an unchallenged advance ruling on customs classification is binding on authorities and quashed a subsequent order reclassifying goods contrary to that ruling.

customs petition_allowed Significant Authority for Advance Rulings Customs Act, 1962 Section 28J Advance ruling binding effect

Lloyds Realty Developers Limited v. Oakwood Asia Pacific Limited

20 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging the arbitral award that rejected the petitioner's claims, holding that the arbitrator did not err in considering prior agreements for context, did not treat time as essence of contract, and correctly found no breach or waiver by the petitioner.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Offshore Technical Service and Marketing Agreement Letter of Intent

Rochem Separation Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

10 Mar 2017 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that pre-consultation before issuing service tax show cause notices exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs is mandatory under CBEC Circulars, quashed non-compliant notices, and allowed the Revenue to initiate fresh proceedings with pre-consultation.

tax appeal_allowed Significant pre-consultation notice show cause notice service tax Finance Act 1994

Kalanagar, Mhasarul, Dist. Nashik v. State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2017 · M.S. Karnik; S.M. Modak

The Bombay High Court held that a caste validity certificate issued to a close blood relative must be respected unless properly revoked following due procedure, and directed issuance of a certificate to the petitioner accordingly.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Validity Certificate Vigilance Cell enquiry

Shri Sakharam Govinda Kadam and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

04 Mar 2017 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The High Court held that land acquisition under the 2013 Act lapses if neither possession is taken nor compensation paid, declaring the 2001 acquisition lapsed due to State's failure to prove possession or tender of compensation.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act Possession Compensation

Manmohan Bhimsen Goyal & Kavita Manmohan Goyal v. Madhuban Motors Pvt. Ltd.

03 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award due to the unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator by one party without an express written waiver, reaffirming that such appointments violate the Arbitration Act and principles of impartiality.

commercial_arbitration petition_allowed Significant unilateral appointment sole arbitrator Section 12(5) Arbitration Act express waiver in writing

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Aegis Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

03 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 6 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award setting aside HPCL's termination of a logistics contract, holding that the Respondent's stop work notice based on a government safety report was justified and did not breach the contract.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Operating and Services Agreement Stop work notice

Hiren Ashwin Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

01 Mar 2017 · N.J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Bombay High Court upheld the condonation of a 1259-day delay in filing a Section 138 NI Act complaint, holding that repeated assurances by the accused constituted sufficient cause and a liberal approach to delay is justified in such quasi-criminal proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act sufficient cause quasi-criminal proceedings

Maruti Anantrao Hingane And Ors. v. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors.

27 Feb 2017 · Nitin Jamdar; M. M. Sathaye
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that Zilla Parishad teachers do not have a vested right to automatic absorption in Municipal Corporations upon inclusion of villages, validating the State's 2019 Government Resolution regulating transfer procedures.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Zilla Parishad teachers Municipal Corporation Government Resolution 2019 Transfer and absorption

Luxempire Realty Private Ltd. v. Eminence Landmarks LLP

25 Feb 2017 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that an arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 16 ACA to implead a non-signatory purchaser with notice of arbitration as a party "claiming through or under" a signatory, and writ interference is permissible only in cases of patent lack of jurisdiction.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 kompetenz-kompetenz non-signatory impleadment

Mahindra Defence Systems Limited v. Ranjana Industries

15 Feb 2017 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award under the MSMED Act, ruling that objections to supplied goods must be raised within 15 days, and dismissed Mahindra's appeal challenging the award for unpaid dues to a micro enterprise.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant MSMED Act arbitration statutory deadline appointed day

Mahindra Defence Systems Limited v. Ranjana Industries

15 Feb 2017 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award in favor of a micro enterprise under the MSMED Act, holding that objections to goods must be raised within 15 days of delivery and that concurrent findings of fact by the arbitral tribunal are not liable to interference.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant MSMED Act Section 18 MSMED Act Section 34 Arbitration Act Section 37 Arbitration Act

Pravin Gajanan Thakur & Ors. v. Kalpana Virbhadra Raut & Ors.

01 Feb 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that no appeal lies against an order condoning delay in filing an appeal under Section 251 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, and the only remedy is revision before the State Government.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 Section 251 MLRC Section 252 MLRC condonation of delay

Kamlakar Haribhau Naik & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

27 Jan 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that Aakarphod Patrak (Hissa Form No.4) is not a document of title and that mutation entries and revenue records govern land ownership.

property petition_dismissed Significant Aakarphod Patrak Hissa Form No.4 Mutation Entry Land Revenue Records

Magnum Unit ‘A’ CHS Limited v. The State of Maharashtra

24 Jan 2017 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that a quasi judicial authority's prior final order rejecting deemed conveyance bars subsequent similar claims under res judicata, quashing the later conveyance granted to Respondent No. 3.

property petition_allowed Significant res judicata Section 11 Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act deemed conveyance quasi judicial authority

Doli Ledha Ravidas v. The State of Maharashtra

14 Jan 2017 · Manish Pitale; Shreeram V. Shirsat
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the murder conviction based on a reliable dying declaration and corroborative evidence, dismissing the appellant's challenge to the sufficiency and credibility of the prosecution case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 27 Indian Evidence Act recovery of weapon

Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation v. Municipal Labour Union

12 Jan 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside the Industrial Court's award directing absorption of contract workers into municipal service, holding no employer-employee relationship existed between the Municipal Corporation and the contractor's workers under the six-factor test from Balwant Rai Saluja.

labor appeal_allowed Significant employer-employee relationship contract workers absorption municipal corporation

Union of India v. Emami Agrotech Ltd

15 Dec 2016 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award rejecting Central Railway's invocation of a Fall Clause to reduce bio-diesel prices, holding that differing freight cost arrangements rendered the prices incomparable.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Fall Clause price comparison

Tushar Laxman Bhakare @ Chawhan v. The Collector & Ors.

27 Oct 2016 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that possession of additional land by NHAI without formal acquisition and compensation violates Article 300-A, directing payment of compensation and completion of acquisition proceedings despite delay.

property appeal_allowed Significant compulsory acquisition Article 300-A National Highways Act, 1956 compensation