High Court of Bombay
3,981 judgments
Suprabha Nitesh Patil v. Nitesh Gajanan Patil
The Bombay High Court held that under Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, a later matrimonial petition must be transferred to the court where the earlier petition is pending for joint disposal, overriding discretionary transfer powers under Section 24 CPC.
M/s. Mathuresh Infrapro Pvt Ltd. v. M/s. Chudiwala Company
The Court held that a suit seeking restitution or relief obtainable by application under Section 144 CPC is barred if filed as a fresh suit, and clever drafting to circumvent this bar warrants rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Soli Behram Sukhadwala v. Nitin D. Sohni & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the revision application, holding that the applicant failed to prove he was a family member residing with the deceased tenant under Section 5(11)(c) of the Bombay Rent Act, and thus was not entitled to tenancy rights.
Narayan Bhau Salve v. Khandu Baburao Salve
The court held that dismissal of appeals for default does not amount to a decree and does not affect the enforceability date of the trial court decree for limitation of execution under Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Pankaj Subhash Tatar v. The State of Maharashtra
Costs of a preliminary inquiry under Section 83 cannot be recovered from persons exonerated in subsequent proceedings under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.
New Sonal Industries Premises Ltd. v. District Deputy Registrar (2) & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that under MOFA, a promoter must convey leasehold rights over the entire land as per the agreement, and the Competent Authority cannot limit conveyance based on FSI utilization when the agreement provides for full conveyance.
Chandrakant C. Patel and Others v. Suryakant Shivlal Parmar and Others
The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of Defendants as mere licensees, holding they failed to prove exclusive possession required for protected tenancy under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act.
Shri Shivam Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Vileparle Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that the Competent Authority under MOFA lacks jurisdiction to substantively review or alter its conveyance orders via Corrigendum, and such disputes over land area must be resolved by Civil Courts.
Abhay V. Khinvasara v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court dismissed a 38-year delayed challenge to land acquisition under the MID Act, holding the acquisition valid and the petition barred by delay and laches.
Shankar Pandu Bharsat v. Anand Subhashchandra Bora
The Bombay High Court upheld limitation under Section 32F(1A) of the BTAL Act, dismissing the petitioners' belated application to purchase agricultural land filed after the statutory two-year period.
Govinda Goga Donde v. Mayur Ramesh Bora
The Bombay High Court Full Bench held that under Section 9-A CPC, a Trial Court cannot frame a preliminary issue disposing of part of a suit or cause of action; jurisdictional objections must dispose of the entire suit or cause of action.
Ashok Babulal Avasthi v. Munna Nizamuddin Khan & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that in tenant suits against municipal demolition, the landlord is a proper party whose joinder the court may permit under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, affirming judicial discretion to add landlords for complete adjudication.
Dagadu Dnyanu Diwase and Ors. v. Prakash Dattatraya Diwase and Ors.
The High Court upheld the appellate decree holding the suit property as self-acquired by Plaintiff's father, dismissing Defendants' claim of joint family ownership and affirming Plaintiff's right to recover possession.
Chandru Mirchandani v. The Settlement Commissioner For Compensation
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking allotment of evacuee land after over five decades, holding the claim barred by delay and laches and emphasizing the necessity of a live legal right and proper parties.
Venkatesh Krishna Bhandarkar v. Henry D’Souza
The Bombay High Court upheld that a leave and licence agreement was valid and subsisting by implied renewal on 1st February 1973, entitling the occupant to protection as a deemed tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947.
Chandni J. Ahuja v. The Union of India
The Bombay High Court quashed reopening notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for lack of valid reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, emphasizing that suspicion alone is insufficient for reopening assessments.
Vidyavardhini Thr. Secretary v. Aniket Akhade
The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order deeming Assistant Professors confirmed after probation under AICTE Regulations, quashing their termination and ordering reinstatement, while denying back wages to one gainfully employed petitioner.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited v. Anil Mansukhlal Doshi & Ors.
The High Court dismissed HPCL's revision application holding that the statutory right of lease renewal under the Caltex Act supersedes contractual renewal rights, and the lease expired in 2003, entitling the plaintiffs to possession.
M/s. B. K. Polimex India Private Limited v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court quashed the Customs order confiscating artworks by Souza and Padamsee as obscene, holding that nudity alone does not constitute obscenity and emphasizing adherence to legal precedents and artistic freedom.
Gangadhar Sonu Sonaware & Ors. v. Namdeo Bhausingh Sonawane & Ors.
The Civil Court suit seeking declaration of ownership by adverse possession is barred under Section 85 of the Maharashtra Tenancy Act as it seeks to defeat final orders of Revenue Authorities, and the appeal against rejection of plaint is allowed.