High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Erangal Comtrade and Consultancy LLP v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

03 Nov 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Amit S. Jamsandekar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that a reassessment notice under section 148 cannot be issued to a non-existent entity and quashed the notice and assessment order issued against a company converted into an LLP.

tax petition_allowed Significant section 148 Income Tax Act non-existent entity reassessment notice conversion of company to LLP

Rakesh S. Kathotia v. Milton Global Ltd.

03 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award for perversity and inherent contradictions, holding that contractual rights cannot be treated as obligations to deny relief despite breaches in a joint venture dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Joint Venture Agreement Contractual rights vs obligations

Manish Ashok Badkas v. Novartis India Ltd.

03 Nov 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court holds that Maharashtra Labour Courts have territorial jurisdiction over unfair labour practice complaints where the employer’s decision is made within Maharashtra, overruling the earlier view that the employee’s situs alone governs jurisdiction.

labour appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction unfair labour practices Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions Act cause of action

Asiya Salim Shaikh & Ors. v. Romell Housing LLP & Ors.

03 Nov 2025 · Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court granted interim reliefs to plaintiffs claiming adverse possession over disputed property, finding serious doubts about defendants' title documents and possession claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant adverse possession interim injunction possession dispute forgery of documents

State of Maharashtra v. Kalyan Sangam Infratech Ltd.

03 Nov 2025 · Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award holding the State liable for material breach affecting toll collections, validating terminal payments and interest awarded to the concessionaire under the Concession Agreement.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Concession Agreement Material Breach Material Adverse Effect Terminal Payments

M3nergy SDN. BHD. v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

03 Nov 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of a Joint Executing Agreement initialled but not signed, affirming the existence of an arbitration agreement and dismissing the challenge to the arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

commercial petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 review Joint Executing Agreement arbitration agreement existence

Miss Pritam Dinkar Adhav v. Union of India & Ors.

03 Nov 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that the Central Government cannot substitute a nominated member of a Cantonment Board mid-tenure without following the removal procedure under Section 34 of the Cantonments Act, 2006, and quashed the impugned substitution notification.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Cantonments Act, 2006 Section 13 Section 34 nomination

Maki Homi Chibber Nee Maki Modi v. State of Maharashtra

03 Nov 2025 · N. J. Jamadar

The High Court quashed the ex parte order granting Unilateral Deemed Conveyance under MOFA, 1963 due to violation of natural justice and remanded the matter for fresh hearing with proper notice.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Unilateral Deemed Conveyance Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 Competent Authority Natural Justice

Shiv Kumar I. Agarwal v. Mehzabeen & Ors.

03 Nov 2025 · M.M. Sathaye

The court held that absence of a subsisting license as on 01.02.1973 precludes protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, and eviction suits against trespassers are not barred by limitation, allowing the writ petition and restoring the ex-parte eviction decree.

civil appeal_allowed Significant leave and license agreement Section 15A Bombay Rent Act subsisting license deemed tenant

Mrs. Anjanabai Rajaram Gore v. Mrs. Manjulabai Baban Gaikwad

03 Nov 2025 · Gauri Godse, J.

The court held that in a suit for possession based on title, limitation under Article 65 starts only when defendant's possession becomes adverse, and mere mutation or long possession without hostile animus does not bar the suit.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant adverse possession limitation period Article 65 Limitation Act mutation entry

Fakira Rambhau Shewale and Ors. v. Vasant Narayan Rane and Ors.

03 Nov 2025 · Gauri Godse

The court held that a written agreement consistent with an oral contract is not a novation, time for payment is not the essence if vendor fails to clear encumbrances, and specific performance binds only the share of the coparcener who executed the agreement in ancestral joint family property.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance oral agreement written contract time essence of contract

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Niloufer Marshall

03 Nov 2025 · Gauri Godse

The High Court held that tenancy rights in public premises cannot be bequeathed by Will in breach of tenancy terms, and unauthorized occupation under the Public Premises Act justifies eviction.

property appeal_allowed Significant Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 tenancy rights bequest of tenancy unauthorized occupation

Rajasthan State Co-op Oil Seed Growers Federation Ltd. v. B.G. Shirke Construction Technology Pvt. Ltd.

03 Nov 2025 · Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that a non-signatory principal employer is bound by an arbitration agreement through implied consent and upheld the arbitral award against it while permitting partial excision of joint liability of the PMC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement non-signatory veritable party privity of contract

Sudhir Madhukar Gurav v. Sakalnarayan J. Sharma

03 Nov 2025 · M.M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act for rent arrears exceeding six months, rejecting tenant's plea of partial payment and hardship.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Bombay Rent Act 1947 Section 12(3)(a) eviction rent arrears

ABC v. Internal Complaints Committee

03 Nov 2025 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the ICC's inquiry under the POSH Act, holding that writ jurisdiction does not ordinarily extend to private entities performing statutory functions when an efficacious statutory appeal remedy exists.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 Constitution of India POSH Act 2013 Internal Complaints Committee natural justice

Purvi Mukesh Gada v. Mukesh Popatlal Gada

01 Nov 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court enhanced interim maintenance from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 3,50,000 per month for a divorced wife, holding that the husband’s financial capacity must be assessed beyond declared income, especially in family business contexts, and that maintenance must reflect the matrimonial standard of living.

family appeal_allowed Significant interim maintenance matrimonial standard of living financial disclosure family business

ISON Builders LLP v. Om Sai Ram Cooperative Housing Society & Ors.

30 Oct 2025 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court dismissed interim reliefs against termination of a developer’s agreement for municipal tenanted property redevelopment, emphasizing tenants’ rights to timely redevelopment over developer’s profit interests, and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Development Agreement Municipal Tenanted Property Redevelopment Interim Relief

Everest Entertainment LLP v. Mahesh Vaman Manjrekar & Ors.

24 Oct 2025 · Amit S. Jamsandekar

The Bombay High Court refused interim injunction against the release of a film alleging copyright infringement and passing off due to gross delay and lack of prima facie case.

intellectual_property petition_dismissed Significant copyright infringement cinematograph film passing off ad-interim relief

Mohan Dhotre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

17 Oct 2025 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti Sathe
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court held that the State Government lacked jurisdiction under Section 15 of the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1953 to dismiss the petitioner from the Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board, quashing the dismissal order passed on a withdrawn complaint.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1953 Section 15 State Government jurisdiction Dismissal from service

XYZ v. Arun Shankar Khutale

17 Oct 2025 · S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of an accused in a POCSO sexual assault case, holding that statements under Section 164 CrPC and victim's disclosures to her mother are insufficient alone to convict without direct evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act Section 164 CrPC sexual assault statement to relative