High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Milind Nandkumar Kulkarni & Ors. v. Kirloskar Ebara Pumps Ltd.

30 Aug 2001 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court upheld the Labour Court's finding that contract workers were not employees of the principal employer, dismissing petitions challenging termination and confirming the necessity of contractors as parties in industrial dispute references.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant employer-employee relationship contract workers Labour Court Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Mr. Suresh Vasudeo Dalvi v. Priyadarshini Indira Gandhi Kreeda Sankul & Ors.

08 Aug 2001 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Court’s order confirming the petitioner’s dismissal for demanding illegal gratification, affirming the admissibility of hearsay evidence and the narrow scope of revisional jurisdiction in domestic enquiries.

labor petition_dismissed Significant domestic enquiry hearsay evidence revisionary jurisdiction MRTU & PULP Act

Late Shri Kashinath Devram and Babubai Thorat Charitable Trust v. State of Maharashtra

14 Jun 2001 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain · 2025:BHC-AS:3984-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of land acquisition partly funded by the State despite delayed Section 6 declaration due to court stay, affirming that partial State funding suffices for public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act.

property petition_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 6 declaration public purpose

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Mrs. Piroza Parvez Driver & Ors.

18 Apr 2001 · Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction and mesne profit orders against HPCL, holding that lease renewal requires formal execution and State action must be fair and reasonable.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lease renewal eviction mesne profit State as landlord

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Piroza Parvez Driver & Ors.

18 Apr 2001 · Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction and mesne profit orders against HPCL, holding that lease renewal requires strict compliance and State entities must act fairly and reasonably in lease matters.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lease renewal eviction suit mesne profits Presidency Small Cause Courts Act

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Pune v. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd.

01 Apr 2001 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court upheld the ITAT's decision allowing management fees paid to associated enterprises, provisions for obsolete inventory, and set-off of EOU losses against other business income under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant management fees associated enterprise transfer pricing provision for obsolete inventory

M/s. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. v. Mumbai Mahanagar Palika & Ors.

16 Mar 2001 · M. S. Sonak; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging octroi valuation based on MRP, holding that absence of protest and statutory remedy precludes relief and refund would cause unjust enrichment.

tax petition_dismissed Significant octroi duty valuation of goods Maximum Retail Price invoice value

Medical Superintendent, Rural Hospital v. Rajashree Lakshman Yadav

09 Mar 2001 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that temporary government appointments without proper selection process do not confer a right to permanency, setting aside Industrial Court orders directing regularisation of such employees.

labour appeal_allowed Significant temporary appointment permanency regularisation back door entry

Pernod Ricard India Private Limited v. The Union of India & Ors.

23 Feb 2001 · Nitin Jamdar; Gauri Godse
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld the Customs authorities' power to demand 100% bank guarantees for differential duty after SVB investigation reports and show-cause notices, limiting Circular No.5/2016's applicability to the investigation phase only.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 18(1) Customs Act Special Valuation Branch provisional assessment bank guarantee

The Chief Officer, Alibag Municipal Council v. Mamta N. Patil & Ors.

18 Jan 2001 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld Industrial Court orders directing regularization of municipal daily wage employees who worked against sanctioned posts for over ten years, rejecting reliance on Model Standing Order 4C for State Instrumentalities lacking power to create posts.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant regularization permanency daily wage workers Model Standing Order 4C

The Divisional Manager, Forest Development Corporation, Nashik v. Tulashiram Rama Khutade

13 Jan 2001 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti Sathe
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Court’s and Single Judge’s orders directing regularization of long-serving daily wage watchmen employed by a government company, holding such engagement as unfair labour practice despite absence of sanctioned posts.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant unfair labour practice regularization permanency daily wage workers

The Commissioner Of Sales Tax Maharashtra v. M-s Nestle India Ltd

06 Jan 2001 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that "Nescafe Premix" is taxable under the specific entry for instant coffee based on common parlance, overruling classification based on ingredient percentage.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant classification of goods sales tax instant coffee common parlance test

Dharmil A. Bodani v. Manju Meadows Pvt. Ltd.

07 Dec 2000 · Sandeep V. Marne

The court upheld the Plaintiffs' majority shareholding under a valid Share Purchase Agreement and declared the Defendants' increase in share capital and allotment of shares to be illegal, restoring Plaintiffs' control over the company.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Share Purchase Agreement Shareholding dispute Increase in authorised share capital Allotment of shares

Neha Shroff v. Union of India

30 Oct 2000 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld penalties under FERA against appellants found to be persons resident outside India based on intention to stay abroad, affirming the applicability of FERA's residence definitions and concurrent findings of fact.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 person resident in India person resident outside India Section 2(p) FERA

IMAX Corporation v. E-City Entertainment (I) Pvt. Ltd.

28 Sep 2000 · Bharati Dangre, J.; Mandira Milind; Milind Salgaonkar
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that foreign arbitral awards are enforceable only against parties to the arbitration, refused enforcement against non-parties absent fraud, and upheld limitation and public policy defenses including FEMA violations.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant foreign arbitral award enforcement Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 corporate veil

Union of India v. Dr. Rustom Sam Boyce

04 Sep 2000 · Sandeep V. Marne

Mesne profits under the Bombay Rent Act are payable only from the date of eviction decree as possession remains lawful during suit pendency, and mesne profits enquiry is an independent proceeding distinct from execution of the decree.

civil appeal_allowed Significant mesne profits Bombay Rent Act wrongful possession eviction decree

Ramchandra Vishnu Sable & Ors. v. Narayan Shankarrao Game Patil & Ors.

27 Jun 2000 · S.M. Modak

The Bombay High Court held that liquidated damages awarded must be reasonable and not penal, reducing the award to refund of earnest money with interest, clarifying the application of Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant liquidated damages Indian Contract Act Section 74 compensation for breach specific performance

Vijaymala Sidling Doijad v. The State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2000 · N.J. Jamadar · 2025:BHC-AS:9766
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that a counter-claim filed after settlement of issues and recording of evidence is generally impermissible and set aside the trial court's order allowing such a belated counter-claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant counter-claim Order VIII Rule 6-A CPC amendment of pleadings limitation

Dilip Lalchand Porwal v. State of Maharashtra

15 Jan 2000 · M. S. Karnik; Gautam A. Ankhand
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The High Court held that the State Human Rights Commission lacks jurisdiction over civil property disputes and quashed its order directing compliance under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 jurisdiction civil dispute

Reeta Mukesh Sehgal v. Union Bharat Sabha & Ors.

24 Dec 1999 · Amit Borkar, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld termination of a college Principal for deliberate alteration of service records and misconduct involving moral turpitude, affirming the proportionality of disciplinary punishment and limited scope of judicial review.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant misconduct moral turpitude disciplinary enquiry service book alteration