High Court of Bombay

4,236 judgments

Year:

Sadanand Mishra v. Union of India

16 Apr 1986 · Nitin Jamdar; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld removal orders against ex-RPF constables for misconduct during suspension, rejecting claims of non-service and delay in appeal as barred by limitation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings natural justice Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959 suspension

Vikas Education Society v. The Grampanchayat Chopadi

04 Nov 1985 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the demolition of a laboratory building, holding that disputed factual issues of possession and ownership are not amenable to writ jurisdiction and that the demolition pursuant to a Gram Sabha resolution was lawful in the interest of public safety.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant writ jurisdiction Article 226 demolition possession

Sanghmitra R. Sandansing v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

08 May 1985 · Nitin Jamdar; M. M. Sathaye
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court upheld the Municipal Corporation's decision denying promotion to the petitioner as Law Officer based on her disciplinary record, affirming that promotion decisions to sensitive posts require consideration of entire service records and are subject to limited judicial review.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant promotion Law Officer Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Departmental Promotion Committee

District Satara v. The State of Maharashtra

16 Jan 1985 · R.D. Dhanuka; M.M. Sathaye

The High Court dismissed writ petitions seeking enhanced compensation under the Fair Compensation Act for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with an award made prior to 2014, holding that the earlier Act governs such cases and the petitioner lacks locus amid pending title disputes.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 30 reference enhanced compensation

Praman Infrastructure Private Limited v. The State of Maharashtra

29 Nov 1984 · AMIT BORKAR, J.
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Bombay High Court held that only facts expressly stated or clearly incorporated in a sale deed or its annexures are relevant for stamp duty valuation, dismissing the petition challenging additional stamp duty demand.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant stamp duty Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) annexure incorporation

Babasaheb Haji Abdul Mullani v. Kolhapur Municipal Corporation

26 Apr 1984 · G. S. Kulkarni; R. N. Laddha
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking alternate land allotment after a 37-year delay, holding that delay and laches bar reopening concluded land acquisition proceedings.

civil petition_dismissed Significant land acquisition alternate land allotment compensation delay and laches

Ajit Bhagwan Sawant v. M/s. Parveen Industries Pvt. Ltd.

29 Mar 1984 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that a workman is not entitled to legal representation in a domestic inquiry solely because the Inquiry Officer is legally trained, affirming that defence representation must comply with statutory and standing order provisions restricting it to fellow workmen or union office-bearers.

labor petition_dismissed Significant domestic inquiry legal representation Inquiry Officer Bombay Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules

The Lokmanya Pan Bazar Association Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra

31 Oct 1983 · Amit Borkar, J.
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld the deemed conveyance in favor of a cooperative society of flat purchasers under MOFA, rejecting the promoter's contractual and procedural objections.

property petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act deemed conveyance Special Patron Members Urban Land Ceiling Act exemption

Tivoli Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

20 Oct 1983 · Alok Aradhe, CJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that municipal rateable value is a rational but not binding yardstick for determining annual value under Section 23(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, and notional interest on security deposits cannot be included in annual value computation.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant annual value municipal rateable value Income Tax Act 1961 Section 22

M/s. Wrangle Investment Limited v. M/s. Mahendra Builders

05 Oct 1983 · Rajesh S. Patil
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the amendment allowing substitution of the plaintiff from a deceased sole proprietor to the partnership firm in an eviction suit, holding that correction of misdescription is permissible despite abatement and limitation objections.

civil petition_dismissed Significant amendment of plaint misdescription of plaintiff Order 1 Rule 10 CPC partnership firm dissolution

Gorakh Rambhau Chothve v. Vilas Eknath Kadam

14 Jul 1983 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act, holding that valid service of notice at tenant's actual residence and monthly quantification of education cess justified eviction for rent arrears exceeding six months.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Bombay Rent Act Section 12(3)(a) demand notice service education cess

Metal Rolling Works Ltd. v. Haresh Kapadia and Ors.

21 Apr 1983 · N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court condoned a 1503-day delay and restored a suit dismissed for want of prosecution due to the ill-health default of the Plaintiff's Advocate, emphasizing that parties should not suffer for their counsel's default when sufficient cause is shown.

civil appeal_allowed Significant condonation of delay dismissal for want of prosecution default of advocate restoration of suit

Rajendra Pawar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

17 Feb 1983 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a reduction in retirement age fixed at appointment cannot be applied retrospectively to employees, protecting their vested right to retire at the originally fixed age.

labor appeal_allowed Significant age of retirement superannuation retrospective amendment vested rights

Shri Tanaji Shankar Anuse v. Maharashtra Rajya Doodh Sahakari Mahasangh Maahanand Dudh Shala

31 Jan 1983 · G. S. Kulkarni
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed a Labour Court order upholding a disciplinary enquiry and termination, holding that failure to issue a clear chargesheet and denial of cross-examination violated natural justice principles.

labor petition_allowed Significant disciplinary enquiry natural justice chargesheet cross-examination

Myra Philomena Collaco v. Lilian Coelho

07 Jul 1982 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court upheld refusal to grant Letters of Administration with a Will due to unexplained suspicious circumstances and the propounder's failure to dispel doubts by personal testimony.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Will execution Letters of Administration Suspicious circumstances Indian Succession Act

Ashok Shantinath Chougule v. The State of Maharashtra

13 Apr 1982 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that physical possession is essential for vesting land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and quashed the acquisition of petitioner’s land where possession was never taken and slab was wrongly applied including mortgaged land.

property appeal_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 48(1) Physical possession Panchanama

Sudhir Kumar Sengupta v. Kusum Pandurang Keni

22 Mar 1982 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act where tenant failed to pay rent arrears exceeding six months within statutory notice period, rejecting tenant's plea of readiness to pay thereafter.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Bombay Rent Act Section 12(3)(a) eviction arrears of rent

M/S. Kumar Beharay Properties LLP v. Shri Rajesh Chandrakant Shinde

15 Jan 1982 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court set aside the trial court's order and rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC as the suit for specific performance was barred by limitation and constituted vexatious litigation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC limitation specific performance registered sale deed

Ashok Ratnapal Narwade v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.

14 Oct 1981 · S.V. Gangapurwala; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that upgraded ACR gradings must be considered for retrospective promotion despite departmental circulars to the contrary, allowing the petitioner’s promotion with retrospective effect.

labor petition_allowed Significant Annual Confidential Report Promotion Retrospective promotion Administrative Circular No.310

Narayan Damodar Thakur & Ors. v. Madanlal Mohanlal Malpani

13 Apr 1981 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Court upheld eviction of a tenant for breach of tenancy by subletting commercial premises to an independent tenant and ceasing business use, affirming that subletting can be inferred without exclusive possession if control and use by a third party is established.

civil petition_dismissed Significant commercial tenancy subletting change of user godown use