High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

M/s. Aswani Associates v. The State of Maharashtra

13 Nov 2025 · Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ; Gautam A. Ankhand, J.
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court held that the government cannot retrospectively curtail TDR entitlement after land surrender and payment of levies, applying promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation principles to grant full TDR to the petitioners.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Transferable Development Rights Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 promissory estoppel legitimate expectation

Master Drilling India Private Limited v. Sarel Drill & Engineering Equipment India Private Limited

12 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court held that an interlocutory order refusing to terminate arbitration on grounds of defective Board quorum is not an arbitral award and declined to interfere, emphasizing limited judicial intervention and applicability of the doctrine of necessity.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Interlocutory order Doctrine of necessity

Sou. Vijaya Arun Beri v. Shri Vijay Waman Bhat

12 Nov 2025 · M.M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of a tenant on landlord’s bona fide family requirement under the Bombay Rent Act, holding that occasional holiday use by tenant does not outweigh landlord’s need and subsequent events do not extinguish bona fide requirement unless completely eclipsed.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant bona fide requirement eviction Bombay Rent Act Article 227

Krishnabai Babya Navale v. Savitri Shankar Gharat

12 Nov 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court held that statutory proceedings under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act conclusively vested ownership in one sister, barring partition suit by the other, and dismissed the suit as barred by limitation and lacking jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 Section 32G Section 32M Sale Certificate

Meena Ramchandra Puranik v. Principal, Sir Parshurambhau College

12 Nov 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe · 2006 SCC OnLine Bom 1243

The High Court held that an appointment to an unsanctioned post without proper selection is illegal and salary from State grants cannot be paid, but protected the employee from recovery of salary paid in good faith.

administrative petition_allowed Significant appointment sanctioned post staffing pattern salary grants

Zanmai Labs Private Limited v. Bitcipher Labs LLP

11 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the arbitral tribunal's interim order directing Zanmai Labs to secure assets on the WazirX platform, rejecting Zanmai's challenge to liability for losses from a cyber-attack and affirming limited appellate interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 17 Section 37 force majeure

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Alka Vijay Chautray & Ors.

11 Nov 2025 · S.M. Modak
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld a compensation award in a motor accident claim, ruling that a light motor vehicle license covers driving a heavy vehicle up to 7500 kg, and that mediclaim and retirement benefits are contractual and not deductible from statutory compensation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor vehicle accident insurance policy breach driver license mediclaim deduction

Iqbal Trading Company v. Union of India

10 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award for denial of natural justice and held that the 1996 Arbitration Act applies to arbitration proceedings commenced after its commencement, overruling the application of the 1940 Act and rejecting the limitation bar.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge natural justice judicial approach

The State of Maharashtra v. Sajjad Ahmed Abdul Aziz Mugal

10 Nov 2025 · A.S. Gadkari; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of Sajjad for the murder of Pallavi, holding that the circumstantial evidence and DNA proof conclusively established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence chain of circumstances extrajudicial confession DNA evidence

The Board of Mumbai Port Authority v. Halani Star & Ors.

07 Nov 2025 · Abhay Ahuja
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that the Court has discretion to condone delay in filing additional written statements under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC in commercial suits, allowing a 684-day delayed filing subject to costs.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 9 CPC additional written statement Commercial Courts Act 2015 condonation of delay

Lok Everest Co-Op.Hsg. Soc. Ltd. v. Jaydeep Developers

07 Nov 2025 · R.I. Chagla

The Court held that the Developer is entitled to complete construction of Wing C[5] as disclosed in the 1993 layout plan and utilize additional FSI arising from change in law without fresh consent, dismissing the Plaintiff’s interim injunction application.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 development potential Floor Space Index (FSI) flat purchase agreement

Sahadev Rama Gadling v. Union of India

07 Nov 2025 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti Sathe

The Bombay High Court held that in absence of an express order excluding suspension, the suspension period must be counted as qualifying service for pension under Rule 23 of CCS Pension Rules, allowing pension to a compulsorily retired government servant.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pension suspension period qualifying service Rule 23 CCS Pension Rules

Manoj Shankar Deshpande v. The State of Maharashtra

07 Nov 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court acquitted a public servant accused of accepting bribe where prosecution evidence showed the subsidy was released before the alleged bribe payment, creating reasonable doubt.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 bribery demand and acceptance of bribe anthracene powder trap

Petrofer Chemie H.R. Fischer GMBH & Co. KG and Hardcastle Petrofer Private Limited v. United Petrofer Limited

06 Nov 2025 · Arif S. Doctor
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court granted interim injunction restraining United Petrofer Limited from using the mark 'PETROFER' or deceptively similar names, holding such use infringed the Plaintiffs' registered trademark rights under Section 29(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

commercial_ip appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Trade name Section 29(5) Trade Marks Act Passing off

Innovations Garment Pvt. Ltd. v. Bhavesh Ramjibhai Gada

06 Nov 2025 · Arif S. Doctor
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld ex parte injunctions protecting the Plaintiff’s registered trade mark and copyright, rejecting the Defendants’ claim of suppression of material facts and clarifying that 'John Doe' suits do not bind unknown infringers indefinitely.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC ex parte injunction suppression of material facts John Doe suit

Innovations Garment Pvt. Ltd. v. Bhavesh Ramjibhai Gada

06 Nov 2025 · Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court upheld ex-parte injunctions protecting the Plaintiff’s registered trade mark and copyright, rejecting defendants’ claim of suppression of material facts based on an unrelated dismissed prior suit and clarifying the nature of 'John Doe' suits.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant ex-parte injunction Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC John Doe suit trade mark infringement

Surendra Hari Ranade v. Keshav Alias Suhas Nilkanth Dandekar

06 Nov 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of tenant on ground of acquisition of suitable alternate residence jointly purchased by tenant, rejecting restrictive bequest as suitable residence and allowing legal heirs to prosecute petition without conferring tenancy rights absent evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant eviction alternate suitable residence Bombay Rent Act inheritance of tenancy

Rohit Ramesh Palve & Ors. v. Tula Shankar Palave & Ors.

06 Nov 2025 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding concurrent findings that the plaintiffs' failure to seek relief against alienation of ancestral property by the Karta for legal necessity barred their claim in the partition suit.

civil appeal_dismissed partition suit ancestral property alienation agreement for sale

Sandip Keda Garud v. The State of Maharashtra

06 Nov 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

The Bombay High Court held that a compassionate appointment to a lower post than that held by the deceased employee is valid if the appointee is qualified, and quashed the rejection of approval by the Education Officer.

administrative petition_allowed Significant compassionate appointment Government Resolution 2002 approval of appointment grant-in-aid

Sanjay Vasantrao Thakur v. State of Maharashtra

06 Nov 2025 · Suman Shyam; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the caste scrutiny committee's rejection of the petitioner's claim to belong to the Thakur tribe based on conclusive genealogical and documentary evidence.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant caste validity certificate Thakur tribe genealogical evidence pre-constitutional documents