High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

M/s. Sushanku Builders Ltd. v. Apex Grievance Redressal Committee

06 Aug 2021 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court upheld the termination of a developer’s appointment under Section 13(2) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act due to admitted forgery and post-order delay, affirming the priority of expeditious slum rehabilitation over developer rights.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Section 13(2) Maharashtra Slum Areas Act developer termination forgery of commencement certificate

Sanjay Phatode v. Commissioner of Police Nagpur City & Ors.

05 Aug 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed a detention order under the MPDA Act due to unexplained delay in forwarding the detention report and violation of the detenue's right to effective representation under Article 22(5).

criminal appeal_allowed Significant MPDA Act detention order Section 3(3) forthwith

Ashish Patel v. Edubridge International School

05 Aug 2021 · R. D. Dhanuka; R. I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court held that a school cannot evade admission directives under the Right to Education Act by claiming minority status granted subsequently and directed admission of the petitioner’s son accordingly.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Right to Education Act, 2009 minority educational institution National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004 admission directives

Sadiquabee Mohd. Usman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra

05 Aug 2021 · S.S. Shinde; N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that detention of an accused in police custody after judicial remand is illegal and awarded compensation for violation of fundamental rights.

criminal petition_allowed Significant illegal detention judicial custody police custody compensation

Atlanta Limited v. Metso India Pvt Ltd

04 Aug 2021 · G. S. Patel
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, a writ of summons in commercial suits must be served with a copy of the plaint as mandated by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and service without it is invalid, negating limitation for filing a written statement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Commercial Courts Act 2015 Code of Civil Procedure 1908 writ of summons copy of plaint

Rammi Paramjeetsingh Rajput v. The State of Maharashtra

04 Aug 2021 · Revati Mohite Dere

The Bombay High Court quashed a proclamation issued under Section 82 Cr.P.C. for failure to provide the mandatory 30-day notice period to the absconding accused.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation absconding accused 30 days notice

Shankar Sadashiv Pednekar v. The State of Maharashtra

04 Aug 2021 · Prasanna B. Varale; N. R. Borkar

The Bombay High Court acquitted Appellant No. 3 from kidnapping charges under Section 364-A IPC due to insufficient evidence and failure of identification.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 364-A IPC kidnapping identification parade disclosure statement

Dr. Raj Mohammed Ali Merchant v. The State of Maharashtra

02 Aug 2021 · R.D. Dhanuka; R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court upheld the cancellation of a BDS degree obtained through submission of a forged caste certificate, dismissing the petitioner’s writ challenging the order.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant cancellation of degree false caste certificate fraudulent admission Article 226

BXIN Office Parks India Pvt. Ltd v. Kailasa Urja Pvt. Ltd

31 Jul 2021 · G.S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that disputes relating to possession and licence fees under leave and licence agreements in Greater Bombay fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court under Section 41 of the PSCC Act, rendering arbitration agreements and Section 9 petitions for interim reliefs in such matters non-maintainable.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 41 PSCC Act exclusive jurisdiction leave and licence agreement arbitrability

Sunil Gundu Desai v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

30 Jul 2021 · R. D. Dhanuka; R. I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court held that compassionate appointments are exempt from government bans on fresh recruitments and quashed the refusal to approve the petitioner’s appointment on compassionate grounds.

administrative petition_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Government Resolution ban on recruitment approval of appointment

Vikas Balwant Alase & Ors. v. Union of India through Secretary & Ors.

29 Jul 2021 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.

The Bombay High Court held that SEBC candidates cannot be allowed to switch to EWS category mid-recruitment process, quashing retrospective State orders permitting such migration as unconstitutional and arbitrary.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant EWS reservation SEBC reservation MSEBC Act retrospective application

Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. v. Mohit Raghuram Hegde

29 Jul 2021 · G.S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties based on accepted sales terms and invoices, and appointed a sole arbitrator despite fraud allegations, which are to be decided by the arbitral tribunal.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act fraud and arbitration jurisdiction

Kashinath Motiram Chavan v. The Commissioner of Police

28 Jul 2021 · S.S. Shinde; N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court upheld the preventive detention of a habitual bootlegger under the MPDA Act, holding that credible material and subjective satisfaction of prejudicial impact on public order and health justified the detention.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant preventive detention bootlegger Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949

Rahul Jyoti Sahani v. Union Territory of Daman & Diu

28 Jul 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed the preventive detention of a petitioner alleged to be a bootlegger, holding that mere proof of bootlegging without material showing adverse effect on public order is insufficient, and that failure to consider the detenue's representation violates constitutional safeguards.

criminal petition_allowed Significant preventive detention bootlegging public order Article 22(5)

Namdev Tukaram Patil & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

28 Jul 2021 · R.D. Dhanuka; R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court held that Rule 41 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules applies to non-teaching staff, directing approval of a Peon's transfer from unaided to aided school and quashing the refusal order.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Rules 1981 Rule 41 transfer of non-teaching staff approval of transfer

Shailesh Chaganrao Pawar v. State of Maharashtra

27 Jul 2021 · S.S. Shinde; N.J. Jamadar

The High Court quashed the petitioner’s externment orders under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, holding that the authorities failed to apply proper mind and establish a live link between offences and the necessity for externment.

criminal petition_allowed Significant externment Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 Section 56 subjective satisfaction

Shri Suyog Gajanan Aundhkar v. State of Maharashtra

27 Jul 2021 · N.J. Jamadar; S.S. Shinde

The Bombay High Court quashed the externment orders against the petitioner for non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

criminal petition_allowed Significant externment order Maharashtra Police Act 1951 section 56(1)(a) show-cause notice

B.B. Rajendra Prasad v. Union of India

23 Jul 2021 · Nitin Jamdar; Manjusha Deshpande
Cites 2 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court held that a government servant compulsorily retired without pending departmental or judicial proceedings is entitled to full pensionary benefits, and provisional pension cannot be granted in absence of such proceedings.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compulsory retirement pensionary benefits provisional pension departmental proceedings

Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Jul 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that a constitutional court's order directing CBI investigation overrides statutory bars under Section 6 of the DSPE Act and Section 17A of the PC Act, dismissing the petition to quash the FIR against the former Maharashtra Home Minister.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 6 DSPE Act Section 17A PC Act CBI investigation constitutional court jurisdiction

The State of Maharashtra v. The Central Bureau of Investigation

22 Jul 2021 · S. S. Shinde; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that CBI's investigation must conform to the scope of the court's order and State consent under Section 6 DSPE Act, allowing investigation into connected matters but restraining excesses beyond the mandate.

criminal other Significant CBI investigation Section 6 DSPE Act Federalism High Court jurisdiction