High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Clestino Raymond Saldanha v. Chinamma Francis Kurian

06 Jan 2020 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that in a Rent Act suit, one legal heir can represent the deceased Plaintiff's entire estate without impleading all other heirs, and the suit does not abate against non-impleaded heirs.

civil petition_dismissed Significant legal representative deceased plaintiff Rent Act suit co-owner

Pradeep Narottamdas Harsora v. The State of Maharashtra

03 Jan 2020 · S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court held that under amended Section 313(5) CrPC, trial courts may take assistance from prosecution and defence in framing questions and allow accused to file written statements, ensuring fair trial procedure.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 313 CrPC Amendment to Section 313 Assistance in framing questions Written statement under Section 313

VRS Foods Limited v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

02 Jan 2020 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court directed the State of Maharashtra to pay the Export Subsidy to VRS Foods Limited, holding that procedural irregularities cannot frustrate a valid entitlement confirmed by competent authority and upheld by Court orders, and that denial of subsidy to an identically placed party violates Article 14.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Export Subsidy Government Resolution Maharashtra Rules of Business Finance Department concurrence

Deelight Fortune Private Limited v. The Union of India

27 Dec 2019 · Nitin Jamdar; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that the VCES 2013 is part of the Finance Act, 1994 and thus eligible for settlement under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, quashing the rejection of the petitioner’s application and directing reconsideration.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme Finance Act 1994 service tax

Kher Nagar Sukhsadan Co-operative Housing Soc Ltd v. The State of Maharashtra

24 Dec 2019 · M.S. Sonak; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that redevelopment rights validly terminated by a housing society do not form part of the insolvent developer’s assets under CIRP moratorium, directing authorities to grant redevelopment permissions to the society’s new developer.

civil petition_allowed Significant Development Agreement Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Moratorium Redevelopment rights

Kaarya Facilities & Services Ltd v. Union of India

24 Dec 2019 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 13

The Bombay High Court held that admitted tax liabilities during investigation constitute sufficient quantification under the SVLDRS Scheme, quashing the rejection of the petitioner’s application and remanding for reconsideration with interest payable.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme tax dues quantification CBIC Circular 27 August 2019 delay and laches

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

Chandrakant Uttam Kolekar & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

02 Dec 2019 · G. S. Kulkarni; R. N. Laddha
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that the Mahalunge-Maan Town Planning Scheme was sanctioned and implemented in violation of statutory procedures and constitutional rights, entitling landowners to monetary compensation and mandating adherence to mandatory consultation and compensation determination processes.

property petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Town Planning Scheme Compensation Land Acquisition

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