High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

Ram Ratna International v. Union of India

29 Oct 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court directed issuance of balance duty credit scrips under the Target Plus Scheme, holding retrospective amendment invalid and clarifying that customs-related issues do not constitute government dues warranting withholding of benefits.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Target Plus Scheme duty credit scrips retrospective amendment export promotion

The State of Maharashtra v. Murlidhar Baburao Chavan & Ors.

29 Oct 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC chain of circumstances

Thought Blurb v. Union of India and Ors.

27 Oct 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that a petitioner whose tax dues were quantified before June 30, 2019, is eligible under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme and must be given a hearing before rejection of the declaration, quashing the summary rejection order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Scheme 2019 tax dues quantification natural justice eligibility under tax amnesty scheme

The Supreme Industries Ltd. v. The CBIC & Others

27 Oct 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court set aside a Customs adjudication order for failing to pass a timely speaking order with reasons under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, directing fresh adjudication and emphasizing the necessity of reasoned quasi-judicial decisions.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 17(5) speaking order quasi-judicial order

Shankar Assana Gaddam v. Achanak Associates Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

26 Oct 2020 · C.V. Bhadang

The Bombay High Court upheld the bar on civil court jurisdiction under Section 430 of the Companies Act, holding that disputes pending before the NCLT cannot be entertained by civil courts.

civil petition_dismissed Significant jurisdiction of civil court Section 430 Companies Act NCLT jurisdiction board resolution challenge

The State of Maharashtra v. Avinash Sadashiv Khristi & Arun Shivaji Chavan

23 Oct 2020 · K.R. Shriram
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal of accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove bribery beyond reasonable doubt and the sanction order was invalid due to non-application of mind.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 20 presumption sanction for prosecution rebuttable presumption

The State of Maharashtra v. Shridhar Madhavrao Murti

23 Oct 2020 · A.S. Gadkari

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of a public servant accused of bribery, holding that demand of illegal gratification is essential and mere possession of tainted money without proof of demand is insufficient for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) illegal gratification

Nitin Kantilal Gandhi; Apurva Ashwin Desai v. Sanket Cooperative Housing Society Limited; State of Maharashtra

23 Oct 2020 · Amit Borkar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that pre-registration agreements do not bind a cooperative society unless ratified, general body resolutions are presumed valid unless directly challenged, and interim relief cannot nullify such resolutions without foundational pleadings.

civil petition_dismissed Significant cooperative housing society pre-incorporation agreement general body resolution maintenance charges

The State of Maharashtra v. Mahammed Isak Mahammad Surve & Sou. Khatija Mahammad Surve

22 Oct 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to inconclusive medical evidence and failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence homicidal death asphyxia suffocation

Ramdas Marne & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

22 Oct 2020 · Sadhana S. Jadhav; N. J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court acquitted appellant Raju by holding the oral dying declaration unreliable and recovery evidence insufficient, emphasizing the need for corroboration and proper chain of custody in murder convictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 34 IPC Section 27 Indian Evidence Act

The State of Maharashtra v. Sanjay Rangrao Choukikar

22 Oct 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a rape case due to failure of the prosecution to satisfactorily prove the prosecutrix's minority and the forcible nature of the act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape minor proof of age birth certificate

Dinesh Santlal Yadav v. Divisional Commissioner

21 Oct 2020 · S.S. Shinde; M.S. Karnik

The Bombay High Court upheld a one-year externment order against the petitioner under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, holding that the Externing Authority validly recorded subjective satisfaction based on multiple FIRs and witness statements indicating threat to public safety and witness apprehension.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant externment order Maharashtra Police Act Section 56 subjective satisfaction

BSI-JDN Joint Venture & Ors. v. The Board of Trustees of the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust

21 Oct 2020 · G. S. Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court held that allegations of fraud and ongoing investigations do not bar reference of contractual disputes to arbitration under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and directed appointment of an arbitral tribunal.

commercial appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement Section 11 Arbitration Act fraud and arbitrability Central Vigilance Commission

Reliable Spaces Pvt Ltd v. Evonik India Pvt Ltd

19 Oct 2020 · G.S. Patel
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award allowing lease termination under a force majeure clause due to lessor's failure to obtain regulatory permissions, dismissing the petitioner's challenge for patent illegality.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant force majeure clause lease agreement MIDC approval MPCB consent-to-establish

Sudam Ramnath Shelke v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Oct 2020 · S. S. Shinde; M. S. Karnik

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man for sexually assaulting a 3-year-old girl, relying on corroborated testimony, medical and DNA evidence, and rejecting defense contentions on delay and injury absence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual assault minor victim Section 376 IPC DNA evidence

Pradeep Kumar Lalit Kumar Pandya v. Harisingh J. Kapadia & Ors.

17 Oct 2020 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Court upheld dismissal of Plaintiff's claim for transmission of tenancy rights under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, holding he failed to prove family membership and residence with deceased tenant at time of death.

property petition_dismissed Significant transmission of tenancy Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Section 7(15)(d) family member

The State of Maharashtra v. Satish V. Pabalkar

16 Oct 2020 · K.R. Shriram

The court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a bigamy case, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove the existence of the first marriage beyond reasonable doubt, and affirmed that the woman in a second marriage is an aggrieved person entitled to file a complaint under Sections 494 and 495 IPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bigamy Section 494 IPC Section 495 IPC aggrieved person

Meher Pheroze Sethna and others v. Pune Cantonment Board and another

16 Oct 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court held that due to respondent inaction, the petitioners' application for repair and renovation of an old grant bungalow is deemed sanctioned under section 238(6) of the Cantonments Act, 2006, affirming their locus standi as legal heirs despite objections based on an unregistered agreement for sale and resumption proposals.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Cantonments Act, 2006 section 238(6) deemed sanction occupancy rights

Meher Pheroze Sethna and others v. Pune Cantonment Board and another

16 Oct 2020 · Ujjal Bhuyan; Anuja Prabhudessai

The Bombay High Court held that inaction by the Cantonment Board beyond statutory timelines results in deemed sanction under section 238(6) of the Cantonments Act, 2006, affirming the petitioners' right as legal heirs to repair their old grant bungalow despite objections based on resumption and an unexecuted agreement for sale.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Cantonments Act, 2006 section 238(6) deemed sanction occupancy rights

Yuvraj Sampatrao Ghorpade v. State of Maharashtra

15 Oct 2020 · Prasanna B. Varale; V. G. Bisht

The High Court acquitted the appellant due to incomplete and unreliable circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of incriminating circumstances for conviction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence chain of evidence identification motive