High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Dattatray Bapu Dighe v. The State of Maharashtra

13 Jun 2017 · S.M. Modak
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that registration of copyright with Indian authorities is not mandatory to initiate criminal prosecution for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 1957.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Copyright Act, 1957 copyright registration criminal prosecution copyright infringement

Raymond Limited v. M/s. Miltex Apparels

08 Jun 2017 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court allowed Raymond's appeal, holding that the arbitration clause in the Distributor Agreement was impliedly extended by parties' conduct and communications, remanding the jurisdictional issue for evidence-based determination.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement extension of contract jurisdictional challenge Section 16 Arbitration Act

Sameer Dattatraya Deshpande & Ors. v. Kishor Shamrao Jadhav

06 Jun 2017 · SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

The executing court has jurisdiction under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC to adjudicate claims of any person, including strangers to the decree, resisting possession by claiming independent rights, and such orders are appealable.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 21 Rule 97 CPC Execution of decree Resistance to possession Stranger to decree

NESCO Limited v. State of Maharashtra

03 May 2017 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti A. Sathe
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that acquisition of private land under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act without giving the landowner a fair opportunity to exercise preferential redevelopment rights is illegal and unconstitutional.

property petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, 1971 Section 14(1) acquisition preferential right of landowner slum rehabilitation

Saurabh R. Shah v. The Urban Development and Town Planning Department

02 May 2017 · A. A. Sayed; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that the reservation on land under a development plan lapses if acquisition is not initiated within statutory timelines, affirming that a purchaser post-plan sanction has locus to issue a purchase notice under Section 127 of the MRTP Act.

property petition_allowed Significant Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act Section 127 land reservation lapsing purchase notice

Prithvi Infra Projects v. Apex Grievance Redressal Committee

01 May 2017 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court upheld the termination of a developer's appointment by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority due to inordinate delay and loss of faith by slum dwellers, rejecting claims of COVID-19 and interim order-based delays.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Slum Rehabilitation Authority Maharashtra Slums Areas Act, 1971 developer termination inordinate delay

Godrej And Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited v. Remi Sales and Engineering Limited

01 May 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that tubes supplied conformed to specifications and that the petitioner was deemed to have accepted the goods upon use, barring rejection thereafter under Section 42 of the Sale of Goods Act.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Sale of Goods Act, 1930 Section 42 acceptance Contractual variation

Uttar Bhartiya Education Society v. Naresh Tejan Thakur

30 Apr 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the termination of a school employee for sexual assault after finding the disciplinary inquiry was fair, evidence sufficient, and procedural irregularities non-prejudicial.

labor appeal_allowed Significant principles of natural justice domestic inquiry disciplinary proceedings preponderance of probabilities

Bharat Hirji Dedhia v. Union of India & Ors.

25 Apr 2017 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 9

The Bombay High Court upheld the Insurance Ombudsman's award directing payment to a policyholder, dismissed the insurer's challenge, and imposed interest and exemplary costs for delay and non-compliance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Insurance Ombudsman IRDA Notification 2017 Health insurance claim Partial repudiation

Hitendra Singh R Chopra v. Cantonment Board Dehuroad & Ors.

20 Apr 2017 · M. S. Sonak; Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court directed the Cantonment Board and PCMC to take immediate and effective action against unauthorised commercial use of basement godowns in Nirman Arcade, rejecting claims of helplessness and invalidating individual members' NOCs.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Cantonments Act 2006 unauthorised conversion Cantonment Board powers writ of mandamus

Bank of Baroda v. Shri Shashikant Pitale & Ors.

07 Apr 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that illegal termination of daily wage workers does not mandate reinstatement or regularisation absent sanctioned posts, directing lump-sum compensation instead.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25F illegal termination reinstatement

M/s. Dunhill Dome Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd v. Manuel Mergulhao

04 Apr 2017 · S.C. GUPTE

The Bombay High Court allowed impleadment of the property-owning society as a necessary party in a suit challenging unauthorized construction under Section 351 of the MMC Act, setting aside the City Civil Court's rejection of impleadment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant impleadment Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Section 351 MMC Act unauthorized construction

Isha Exim v. Union of India

31 Mar 2017 · G.S. Kulkarni; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court held that an unchallenged advance ruling on customs classification is binding on authorities and quashed a subsequent order reclassifying goods contrary to that ruling.

customs petition_allowed Significant Authority for Advance Rulings Customs Act, 1962 Section 28J Advance ruling binding effect

Lloyds Realty Developers Limited v. Oakwood Asia Pacific Limited

20 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging the arbitral award that rejected the petitioner's claims, holding that the arbitrator did not err in considering prior agreements for context, did not treat time as essence of contract, and correctly found no breach or waiver by the petitioner.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Offshore Technical Service and Marketing Agreement Letter of Intent

Rochem Separation Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

10 Mar 2017 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that pre-consultation before issuing service tax show cause notices exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs is mandatory under CBEC Circulars, quashed non-compliant notices, and allowed the Revenue to initiate fresh proceedings with pre-consultation.

tax appeal_allowed Significant pre-consultation notice show cause notice service tax Finance Act 1994

Kalanagar, Mhasarul, Dist. Nashik v. State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2017 · M.S. Karnik; S.M. Modak
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that a caste validity certificate issued to a close blood relative must be respected unless properly revoked following due procedure, and directed issuance of a certificate to the petitioner accordingly.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee Validity Certificate Vigilance Cell enquiry

Shri Sakharam Govinda Kadam and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

04 Mar 2017 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The High Court held that land acquisition under the 2013 Act lapses if neither possession is taken nor compensation paid, declaring the 2001 acquisition lapsed due to State's failure to prove possession or tender of compensation.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act Possession Compensation

Manmohan Bhimsen Goyal & Kavita Manmohan Goyal v. Madhuban Motors Pvt. Ltd.

03 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award due to the unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator by one party without an express written waiver, reaffirming that such appointments violate the Arbitration Act and principles of impartiality.

commercial_arbitration petition_allowed Significant unilateral appointment sole arbitrator Section 12(5) Arbitration Act express waiver in writing

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Aegis Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

03 Mar 2017 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 6 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award setting aside HPCL's termination of a logistics contract, holding that the Respondent's stop work notice based on a government safety report was justified and did not breach the contract.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Operating and Services Agreement Stop work notice

Hiren Ashwin Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

01 Mar 2017 · N.J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 10

The Bombay High Court upheld the condonation of a 1259-day delay in filing a Section 138 NI Act complaint, holding that repeated assurances by the accused constituted sufficient cause and a liberal approach to delay is justified in such quasi-criminal proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act sufficient cause quasi-criminal proceedings