High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

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

Balasaheb Sonba Chavan v. Dilip Baburao Rajput

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

The Bombay High Court allowed the appellant's appeal directing transfer of the Vendor's license to him, quashing the suspension order based on resolved partnership disputes.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Vendor's License Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 Partnership Dispute License Transfer

Ramesh Tulshiram Bhutekar & Ors. v. The Asiatic Society of Mumbai & Ors.

06 Nov 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Sandesh D. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that the Charity Commissioner under Section 41A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act has no jurisdiction to interfere with public trust elections once declared, quashing the impugned order directing election procedures.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Section 41A Charity Commissioner public trust election

Abhay Manohar Paranjape & Ors. v. Shivnagari Cooperative Housing Society Limited & Ors.

06 Nov 2025 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that lawful complaints and litigation by cooperative society members cannot justify expulsion under Section 35 without clear, reasoned findings of detrimental conduct, restoring the petitioners' membership.

civil petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act Section 35 expulsion from cooperative society lawful litigation

M/s. Otarmal Kantilal & Co. v. Ullhas Shankar Naik & Anr.

04 Nov 2025 · Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that a garnishee must pay over all amounts credited to the judgment debtor's account during the currency of a warrant of attachment, not just the balance on the warrant date.

civil appeal_allowed Significant warrant of attachment garnishee decree-holder summary suit

Ramprakash @ Popat Govind Manohar v. State of Maharashtra

04 Nov 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The High Court acquitted the appellant of abetment to suicide and cruelty charges due to insufficient evidence of instigation, proximate cause, and specific cruelty under sections 306 and 498-A IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant abetment to suicide section 306 IPC section 498-A IPC cruelty

Kafeel Ahmed Mohd Ayub v. The State of Maharashtra

04 Nov 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court granted bail to an accused in a serious terror case due to prolonged trial delay and the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21, overriding statutory bail restrictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail prolonged incarceration speedy trial Article 21

Nihal Ahmed Abdulla v. Malegaon Municipal Corporation

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

The Bombay High Court directed the Malegaon Municipal Corporation to promptly demolish illegal constructions on the petitioners' land, emphasizing strict enforcement of building laws and rejecting excuses of resource constraints or ownership disputes.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant illegal construction unauthorized construction municipal corporation duty demolition

Satish Murlidhar Inamdar & Ors. v. Amogh Sawant & Ors.

04 Nov 2025 · Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court held that third-party purchasers through a terminated developer cannot enforce rights against the Society or new developer, affirming that the Society is not a promoter under MOFA in such circumstances.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 promoter liability third-party purchasers development agreement termination

Om Swayambhu Siddhivinayak v. Harischandra Dinkar Gaikwad

04 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court held that disputes arising from a Development Agreement and related Supplemental Agreement are arbitrable under an expansive arbitration clause, and mere allegations of fraud do not oust arbitration jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 8 application arbitrability of fraud Development Agreement