High Court of Bombay
4,236 judgments
Aliasgar Ramzan Dekhani v. Maharashtra State Board of Waqfs
The Bombay High Court held that mere registration of a Muslim Public Trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act does not automatically convert it into a Waqf under Section 43 of the Waqf Act, 1995, and set aside the Waqf Board's registration and the Tribunal's dismissal of the challenge thereto.
Aliasgar Ramzan Dekhani v. Maharashtra State Board of Waqfs
The Bombay High Court held that mere registration of a Muslim Public Trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act does not automatically convert it into a Waqf under Section 43 of the Waqf Act, 1995, and set aside the Waqf Board's registration order and the Tribunal's dismissal of the challenge thereto.
Mr. Arun Kumar Ohri v. Mr. Rajendra W. Khanna
The Bombay High Court upheld the Competent Authority’s jurisdiction to award and enforce damages under Section 24(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to execution proceedings as an abuse of process.
Subramaniyan Kanakkan v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's refusal to condone a five-year delay in filing a service-related Original Application, holding that pre-existing causes and the Covid-19 pandemic do not justify delay beyond the prescribed limitation period.
Babu Abdul Ruf Sardar v. The State of Maharashtra
Bail was denied to an accused facing serious charges of illegal entry and forged identity documents, emphasizing that possession of identity cards does not establish citizenship and the burden lies on the accused to prove lawful citizenship.
Volvo Group India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that procedural non-compliance under rebate notifications cannot justify rejection of excise duty rebate claims if substantive conditions are met and remanded the matter for fresh consideration on merits.
Pooja Manish Shah v. Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the scrutiny committee's cancellation of a caste certificate obtained through fraudulent identity claims, emphasizing limited judicial interference in factual findings under Article 226.
Abdul Rehman Adam Dawa & Ors. v. District Deputy Registrar of Coop. Societies, K-West Ward, Mumbai Suburban District & Ors.
The Bombay High Court allowed bifurcation of a building from a large cooperative housing society under Section 18 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, holding that the petitioners satisfied the legal tests of collective welfare, better administration, and long-term stability.
Sadguru Universal CHS Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that registration of separate cooperative societies for commercial and residential units in a single building is permissible only upon factual proof of genuine physical and functional separation, and remanded the matter for fresh inquiry.
K. M. Realty v. Diamond Hill Co-Operative Housing Society Limited
The court upheld the injunction restraining the developer from constructing beyond the approved layout and MOFA agreements without fresh consent of flat purchasers, clarifying the scope of Sections 7 and 7A of MOFA regarding additional buildings.
Maruti Baburao Tambe v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that a quasi-judicial authority may entertain a procedural review to cure breach of natural justice even without explicit statutory power, directing the authority to decide the pending review application after hearing the petitioners.
M/s. Terna Polytechnic v. Shri Ravi Bhadrappa Randale
The Bombay High Court held that uninterrupted service transferred between two educational institutions under the same management constitutes continuous service for gratuity calculation based on last drawn wages at final cessation.
Natvar T. Patel and others v. State of Maharashtra and others
The Bombay High Court set aside the Thane Municipal Corporation's regularisation order for unauthorized construction over a municipal drain, holding it illegal and an abuse of power.
Central Depository Services (India) Ltd. v. Rajendra Yeshwant Shah and Ors.
The Court held that execution proceedings of a decree under the Arbitration Act, 1940 are governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, making appeals maintainable under Letters Patent, and upheld liability of CDSL and Amu for breach of injunction in transferring shares.
Vijay Arvind Pore v. Rupali Ramdas Deshmukh
The High Court held that without evidence that hazardous goods were carried at the time of the accident, the insurance company remains liable to pay compensation despite the driver's lack of hazardous goods endorsement.
Gorai Nagar Maharashtra Grihanirman Vasahat Sanghatana v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court quashed the allotment of a public plot to a religious trust due to lack of public advertisement, arbitrariness, and violation of MHADA rules, emphasizing transparency and fairness in public land allotments.
Vishwanath Sakharam Churi v. Vijay Sakharam Churi
The High Court held that revision against an order rejecting application for rejection of Plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC lies under Section 34(4) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act and dismissed the revision filed under Section 115 CPC.
M/s. K.G. Associates v. The District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pune
The Bombay High Court held that constructed bungalows qualify as flats under MOFA entitling the Society to deemed conveyance, while open plots do not, validating the Competent Authority's order and condemning breach of interim court orders.
Musa Mainuddin Varekar v. Seludhan Mistry
The Bombay High Court dismissed the petitioners' claim to tenancy rights over agricultural land, holding that prior admissions and final orders recognizing the respondent's occupancy preclude tenancy claims under the Maharashtra Tenancy Agricultural Lands Act.
Yusuf Yunus Kantharia v. Bombay Housing And Area Development Authority & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the State's failure to pay compensation for compulsory acquisition of property for over 36 years violates constitutional rights and directed immediate interim compensation and expeditious determination of final compensation under the MHADA Act.