High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Dnynoba Narayan Dhore v. Smt. Champabai Deoji Dhore

21 Sep 2013 · Bharati Dangre

The Bombay High Court upheld the appellate order allowing amendment of pleadings to include partition claim in a joint family property suit, holding that limitation and review grounds were premature and the amendment did not change the suit's nature.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order 6 Rule 17 CPC amendment of pleadings limitation power of review

Digant Parekh (HUF) v. Akruti Kailash Construction & Ors.

16 Sep 2013 · Amit Borkar

The High Court held that a statutory Notification transferring appellate jurisdiction takes immediate effect divesting the earlier authority, and purchasers under a registered MOFA agreement are entitled to co-operative society membership despite unpaid dues or pending civil suits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 deemed membership registered agreement for sale

Electropneumatics And Hydraulics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Appasaheb M. Todmal

07 Sep 2013 · Sandeep V. Marne J.

The Bombay High Court held that wage settlements with recognized unions bind all workmen regardless of union membership, invalidating employer-imposed conditions of signing undertakings, and that complaints for enforcement of such settlements are not barred by limitation due to continuing cause of action.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act Section 18 recognized union wage settlement Letter of Acceptance

CREDAI-PUNE Metro v. The State of Maharashtra

31 Aug 2013 · Sunil B. Shukre; Rajesh S. Patil
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that under Pune Development Control Rules, roads do not qualify as built-up area for grant of TDR, and thus dismissed writ petitions seeking additional TDR for road construction.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Transferable Development Rights Floor Space Index Development Control Rules Built-up area

Sakharam Parvati Gaikwad & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Aug 2013 · A.S. Gadkari; Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court upheld the murder convictions of two appellants based on credible eyewitness and medical evidence while acquitting two others due to insufficient proof of their involvement.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC murder eyewitness testimony benefit of doubt

Anandrao Dinkar Pachundkar v. Hon’ble Minister for Revenue & Forest Department

31 Jul 2013 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging revenue authorities’ orders denying survey and mutation based on interpolated records, holding that title disputes must be resolved through civil suit and not writ proceedings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 Section 20(2) Section 59 city survey

Vitesco Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. v. Christopher Francis Dais

24 Jul 2013 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that the Controlling Authority has jurisdiction under the Payment of Gratuity Act to adjudicate gratuity claims arising from better contractual terms under Section 4(5), dismissing the employer’s challenge.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Section 4(5) Section 7 jurisdiction contractual gratuity

Santosh Rajaram Wankhede v. The State of Maharashtra

09 Jul 2013 · S.S. Shinde; N.J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court modified the appellant's conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC based on consistent dying declarations and absence of premeditation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part II IPC culpable homicide

The BEST Workers Union v. The BEST Undertaking

18 Jun 2013 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that only the recognised Representative Union can prosecute collective industrial disputes under the MIR Act, and unrecognised unions cannot represent collective disputes even if termination issues are involved.

labor appeal_allowed Significant recognised union unrecognised union collective dispute Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946

Pralhad Balkrishna Balghare v. Suryakant Balkrishna Balghare

17 Jun 2013 · N.J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court upheld injunction restraining alienation of ancestral joint family property on the basis that a coparcener cannot validly gift his undivided interest prior to actual partition under the Hindu Succession Act.

property petition_dismissed Significant joint family property coparcener notional partition Hindu Succession Act 1956

Abhyudaya Dnyanvardhini Sanstha v. Chandrakant Shrirang Gaikar

13 Jun 2013 · Amit Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court upheld the setting aside of a teacher's termination due to biased inquiry proceedings and ordered reinstatement with back wages, emphasizing the necessity of impartiality in disciplinary inquiries.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary inquiry bias nemo judex in causa sua back wages

Evershine Enterprises v. Union of India

13 Jun 2013 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The Bombay High Court held that under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, authorities must verify and adjust predeposited or recovered amounts before determining tax dues, quashing the impugned demand for failure to do so.

tax petition_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme Finance Act 2019 Section 124(2) predeposit adjustment

M/s. Forbes Gokak Ltd. v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

26 Apr 2013 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld the quantum of mesne profits payable by BPCL but reduced the interest rate from 9% to 6% per annum, holding the transaction was not commercial under Section 34 CPC, and directed exclusion of interim payments in interest calculation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant mesne profits Section 34 CPC commercial transaction interest rate

Vallabhnagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

05 Apr 2013 · Amit Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The court held that a cooperative housing society’s demand for lease premium is subject to statutory ceilings under Section 79A, and membership cannot be denied if statutory dues and formalities are complied with, dismissing the petition challenging grant of membership.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act Section 79A lease premium transfer of membership

PVR Limited v. State of Maharashtra

04 Apr 2013 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that Government Orders prohibiting collection of convenience fees on online cinema ticket bookings lack statutory authority and violate the fundamental right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g), and thus quashed the impugned orders.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant convenience fee online ticket booking Maharashtra Entertainment Duty Act, 1923 Article 19(1)(g)

Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors.

28 Mar 2013 · K.R. Shriram; Amit B. Borkar · 2021 (131) taxmann.com 52 (Bombay)
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment beyond four years is invalid without clear proof of failure to disclose material facts, and a mere change of opinion by the Revenue does not justify reassessment.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reopening of assessment

State of Maharashtra v. Surendra G. Ghodake

26 Mar 2013 · S. V. Gangapurwala, ACJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J.
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that an employee dismissed due to criminal conviction set aside by compromise is not entitled to full back wages upon reinstatement, affirming the discretionary nature of such payments under service rules.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant back wages reinstatement criminal conviction compromise acquittal

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 v. SVD Resins & Plastics Pvt. Ltd.

12 Mar 2013 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan
Cites 1 · Cited by 8

The Bombay High Court dismissed the revenue's appeals, holding that additions under Section 69C require specific proof of bogus transactions and that general information from Sales Tax authorities is insufficient to discard entire purchases.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 69C Income Tax Act bogus purchases addition to income genuineness of transactions

SLS Energy Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Ors.

22 Feb 2013 · Dhiraj Singh Thakur; Kamal Khata
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that reopening income tax assessments for pre-2013-14 years on the ground of excessive share premium is unjustified without tangible material, as share premium is a capital receipt and relevant statutory amendments are prospective.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Reassessment Share premium

M/s. Parle Products Ltd. v. Union of India

14 Feb 2013 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 1 · Cited by 16

The Bombay High Court held that exported biscuits not bearing retail sale price in rupees are not exempt under notification No.3/2006-CE, entitling the manufacturer to rebate of excise duty paid, and directed refund of duty retained without authority of law.

tax petition_allowed Significant Central Excise Act, 1944 exemption notification No.3/2006-CE retail sale price exported goods