High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Dr. Nikhil Shah & Ors. v. The Pune Cantonment Board & Ors.

11 Sep 2018 · Alok Aradhe, CJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the use of Hadapsar Industrial Estate land for solid waste processing by Pune Cantonment Board and Pune Municipal Corporation under the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, dismissing petitions seeking its relocation outside Pune city limits.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 Municipal solid waste Dump site suitability Pune Cantonment Board

Samir Narain Bhojwani v. Siddhivinayak Realtors LLP

07 Sep 2018 · Amit Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The court held that membership proceedings under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act are limited to membership entitlement and do not adjudicate ownership rights, dismissing challenges based on a set-aside arbitral award and emphasizing exhaustion of statutory remedies.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act Section 23(2) membership entitlement arbitral award set aside

Shree Khambhati Modh Vanik Samaj v. State of Maharashtra

28 Aug 2018 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that only trustees or beneficiaries deriving benefit under the trust qualify as "persons having interest" entitled to intervene in section 36 proceedings, and persons with adverse contractual interests cannot intervene before the Charity Commissioner.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 Section 36 person having interest Charity Commissioner

Fortune Developers and Infrastructure v. Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors.

09 Aug 2018 · M. S. Sonak; Kamal Khata
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The Bombay High Court quashed the stop work order against a construction project near Yerawada Central Prison, holding that the prison rules do not restrict construction beyond prison perimeter walls and that the petitioner’s property rights were unlawfully infringed.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Stop Work Notice Maharashtra Prisons Rules 1964 Property Rights Article 300A Buffer Zone

NTPC BHEL Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. Shree Electricals & Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd.

06 Aug 2018 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna · 2025:BHC-AS:12377-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that the delay in filing the Section 34 application challenging the arbitral award was condonable under Section 14 of the Limitation Act due to bona fide prosecution of a prior writ petition and COVID-19 limitation extensions.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 application Limitation Section 14 Limitation Act

Ashok Gangadhar Puranik & Atul Gangadhar Puranik v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

02 Aug 2018 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Bombay High Court held that the Court Receiver was discharged before acquisition, upheld the validity of compensation paid to landowners, quashed State's refund demands, dismissed challenges by Ranjit, and directed completion of acquisition with costs against vexatious litigant.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition Court Receiver advance compensation family partition suit

M/s. Magnum Opus IT Consulting Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Artcad Systems

31 Jul 2018 · Nitin Jamdar; Bharati H. Dangre; Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court Full Bench held that Single Judge jurisdiction under Rule 18(3) extends to all quasi-judicial orders under any legislation, overruling conflicting Division Bench decisions.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Rule 18 Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 Single Judge jurisdiction Division Bench jurisdiction quasi-judicial orders

Bhawarlal Parasmal Joshi v. The Solapur Municipal Corporation & Ors.

31 Jul 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that successors-in-title of lessees have a right to seek renewal, not extension, of municipal lease, and the Municipal Corporation must consider renewal applications without arbitrary eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant lease renewal lease extension municipal property Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act 1949

Sai Agencies v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Jul 2018 · A.A. Sayed; S.G. Dige
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging tender rejection, holding that the petitioner lacked requisite experience certificates and that the tender allotment to other bidders was proper and free from arbitrariness or mala fides.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant judicial review tender process experience certificate arbitrariness

Pramod V. Bhatre v. Life Insurance Corporation of India

27 Jul 2018 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking regularization of a long-serving temporary LIC employee, holding that he was not covered by the Supreme Court-mandated absorption scheme and thus not entitled to permanent status or benefits.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant regularization temporary employee permanent status Life Insurance Corporation of India

Mr. Shrikrishna Bhikaji Bondge v. State of Maharashtra

09 Jul 2018 · S. C. GUPTE; SURENDRA P. TAVADE

The Bombay High Court held that government orders restricting recruitment do not apply retrospectively to invalidate prior appointments and directed approval and salary grant for a peon's appointment made in 2009.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Government Resolution retrospective effect appointment approval surplus staff

Mohammed Zain Khan v. Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority

05 Jul 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that complaints under Section 31 of RERA are maintainable only for projects liable to registration, dismissing the appellant's claim against an unregistered agricultural land project not capable of registration.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Real Estate Regulatory Authority RERA Section 31 complaint Non-registration

M/s. Pragatej Builders And Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Abhishek Anuj Sukhadia and Mrs. Chaya Anuj Sukhadia

04 Jul 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld MahaRERA's order directing the promoter to pay interest from the original possession date under the sale agreement, rejecting the promoter's claim that the revised project completion date or COVID-19 moratorium exempted it from liability.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 Section 18 RERA Section 4(2)(l)(C) RERA interest on delayed possession

Manvi Hakka Sanrakshan and Jagruti v. Charity Commissioner of Maharashtra and Ors.

04 Jul 2018 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court quashed a Charity Commissioner circular directing trusts to remove phrases like 'corruption eradication' and 'human rights' from their names, holding such objectives fall within charitable purposes under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 and the circular lacked statutory authority.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Charitable purposes Revised Circular No.543 Charity Commissioner

Subrat Kumar Sahoo v. Mumbai University and College Tribunal & Ors.

03 Jul 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld reinstatement after wrongful termination without enquiry, allowed fresh enquiry with subsistence allowance during enquiry period, and set aside denial of backwages pending enquiry.

labor petition_allowed Significant termination of service disciplinary enquiry reinstatement with continuity subsistence allowance

Dhondu Sakharam Tambe & Rupali Dhondu Tambe v. The Union of India

03 Jul 2018 · Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed compensation to the parents of a deceased train passenger based on circumstantial evidence and established bonafide passenger status despite non-reporting of the incident to railway officials.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Railway Claims Tribunal compensation claim untoward incident

Chogalal Santokhji Raval v. Sjamkarprasad Jagnath Varma

02 Jul 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Court held that possession after expiry of a license does not confer protected tenant status under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act and upheld the decree for recovery of possession in favor of the Plaintiff.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Leave and License Agreement Section 15A Bombay Rent Act Protected tenant Section 116 Indian Evidence Act

Blossom Industries Limited v. Union of India

29 Jun 2018 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a GST show cause notice on production overhead charges and misclassification, holding that statutory remedies must be exhausted and the notice was not without jurisdiction.

tax petition_dismissed Significant GST jurisdiction show cause notice alcoholic liquor tax Advance Ruling

KSL & Industries Ltd v. Patheja Forgings & Auto Parts Manufacturing Ltd

28 Jun 2018 · Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court held that winding-up proceedings must be transferred to the NCLT under Section 434(1)(c) unless the company has reached irreversible corporate death, enabling resolution under the IBC.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Section 434(1)(c) Companies Act Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code winding-up proceedings corporate insolvency resolution

Gayatri Construction v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Jun 2018 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld a unilateral deemed conveyance order granting land ownership to a cooperative housing society under MOFA, rejecting the petitioner's challenge based on prior lease agreements and procedural grounds.

property petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 unilateral deemed conveyance lease vs ownership principles of natural justice