High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

Santosh Namdeo Koli & Ors. v. Bhanudas Yesu Gadade & Ors.

16 Dec 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld the condonation of delay in filing correction proceedings under the Consolidation Scheme, emphasizing discretionary power and relevance of a prior Tehsildar order in assessing delay.

property petition_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Consolidation Scheme Section 32 Maharashtra Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 reasonable period

Manaj Tollway Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra

12 Dec 2019 · G. S. Kulkarni
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of consent terms settling an arbitration award executed during President's Rule, dismissing the State's review petition challenging the settlement's authority and approval.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Consent terms President's Rule Article 356

Eknath Namdev Lashkare & Ors. v. Pancharatna Properties & Ors.

30 Nov 2019 · Amit Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that disputes involving a cooperative society's property and management, including those with a developer acting as the society's agent, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Cooperative Court under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 Section 91 jurisdiction Cooperative Court development agreement

Nava Samaj Mandal v. State of Maharashtra

26 Nov 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court upheld the School Tribunal's order setting aside the respondent's oral termination for lack of acceptance of resignation and directed reinstatement with backwages.

labor petition_dismissed Significant resignation acceptance oral termination reinstatement part-time teacher offer

Raptakos Brett & Co. Ltd. v. Pawan Sharma

21 Nov 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that the Industrial Court at Mumbai has jurisdiction to entertain an unfair labour practice complaint challenging a transfer order issued from Mumbai, even though the employee was posted outside Maharashtra.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Industrial Court jurisdiction unfair labour practice transfer order Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971

State of Uttar Pradesh v. Tata Consultancy Services Limited

18 Nov 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay TCS for completed examination services, rejecting the plea of contract frustration due to self-induced cancellation.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 56 Indian Contract Act Frustration of contract UP Legislative Assembly Secretariat

Bramhanand Kanojia v. Union of India & Ors.

08 Nov 2019 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain · 2024 (11) TMI 1139
Cites 0 · Cited by 10

The Bombay High Court held that admission of duty liability before 30 June 2019 constitutes valid quantification under the SVLDR Scheme, allowing the petitioner’s application despite a later show cause notice, and directed recalculation and acceptance of the declaration.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 Section 125(1)(e) quantification of duty service tax liability

Vedant Estate & Properties v. Chief Executive Officer, Pune Metropolitan Regional Development Authority

22 Oct 2019 · S.C. GUPTE; MADHAV JAMDAR

The Bombay High Court held that occupation certificates cannot be withheld based on unsubstantiated proposals not reflected in sanctioned or draft development plans, directing immediate issuance to the petitioner.

administrative petition_allowed Significant occupation certificate planning permission Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act proposed district road

Ganesh Murgesh Bajantri v. The State of Maharashtra

18 Oct 2019 · S.S. Shinde; M.S. Karnik

The Bombay High Court quashed an externment order for being based on acquitted cases and for excessive, unreasoned extension beyond the area of offences, emphasizing the need for valid grounds and recorded reasons in externment orders.

criminal petition_allowed Significant externment Mumbai Police Act, 1951 subjective satisfaction acquittal

Bhojraj Hasaram Gurunani v. Abdul Majid Haji Kadarso Maner

16 Oct 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court upheld eviction decrees against a tenant for unlawful subletting, bonafide requirement by landlord, and default in payment of rent, rejecting tenant's application for fixation of standard rent and claims of rent payment by money order.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 eviction unlawful subletting bonafide requirement

Svitzer Hazira Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

09 Oct 2019 · K. R. Shriram; Amit B. Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that prior approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act must be obtained before issuing a reopening notice under Section 148, and failure to do so renders the notice invalid and liable to be quashed.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 151 Income Tax Act prior approval reopening of assessment

Binaifer Batiwala v. Kadambagiri Estates Pvt. Ltd.

01 Oct 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of a tenant for erecting a permanent unauthorized structure annexed to the tenanted premises under Section 16(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

civil petition_dismissed Significant permanent structure Maharashtra Rent Control Act Section 16(1)(b) tenant eviction

The Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shri Intaj Mainuddin Shaikh

26 Sep 2019 · Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that appeals against interim compensation awards under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act involving less than Rs. 1,00,000/- are not maintainable under amended Section 173(2), dismissing the insurance company's appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 140 Section 166 Section 173

Hirabai Dattatray Mankar v. Dodke Associates

11 Sep 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court dismissed the petition challenging closure of execution proceedings, holding that objections requiring fresh suit relief cannot be entertained in execution and must be diligently pursued.

civil petition_dismissed Significant execution proceedings objections in execution satisfaction of decree partition claim

Sandoz Private Limited v. Mahadeo Gajanand Narale

11 Sep 2019 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that a domestic enquiry conducted with proper notice at the employee's known address complies with natural justice, and failure to participate or update address disentitles the employee from challenging the enquiry's legality.

labor appeal_allowed Significant domestic enquiry principles of natural justice unauthorized absence change of address

Sayla Realtors v. Saurashtra CHS Ltd

30 Aug 2019 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a review petition challenging the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that such orders are not reviewable and that the contested amendment provision is not yet in force.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 11(3-A) 2019 Amendment Act

Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. A Consortium of Sime Darby Engineering Sdn. Bhd. and Swiber Offshore Construction Pte. Ltd.

28 Aug 2019 · Nitin Jamdar; C. V. Bhadang
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that orders rejecting amendments to a Section 34 arbitration petition are not appealable under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, dismissing the appeal as not maintainable.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 34 Arbitration Act Section 37 Arbitration Act Appealability of interlocutory orders Amendment to arbitration petition

Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra

28 Aug 2019 · S.V. Gangapurwala; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that incomplete closure applications communicated as deficient within 60 days do not trigger deemed permission under Section 25-O(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, dismissing petitions seeking deemed closure.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25-O closure of establishment deemed permission

The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Mumbai East Commissionerate v. Larsen & Toubro Limited

28 Aug 2019 · G. S. Kulkarni; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld the retrospective applicability of amendments to Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, allowing proportionate reversal of credit for inputs used in exempted goods, and dismissed the revenue's appeal against the respondent.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 Rule 6 Finance Act, 2010 retrospective amendment

Kuber Health Food And Allied Services Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India

27 Aug 2019 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that admission of service tax liability during investigation before 30 June 2019 qualifies as quantification under the SVLDR Scheme, entitling the petitioner to its benefits despite a later show cause notice.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 service tax liability quantification of demand eligibility under SVLDR Scheme