High Court of Bombay

5,061 judgments

Year:

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

30 Sep 2011 · Nitin Jamdar; N.R. Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR alleging criminal offences in a loan recovery dispute, holding it to be a civil matter and abuse of criminal process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing FIR Section 482 CrPC loan recovery dispute non-performing asset

Citizen Constructions v. Parvez Mohammed Yusuf Kokani

28 Sep 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 50

The High Court modified a blanket injunction restraining transfer of a disputed plot, emphasizing the need to balance equities where the plaintiff’s claim is based on an unregistered agreement executed before vendors acquired title, while the defendant holds registered sale deed and has commenced construction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Agreement for Sale Specific Performance Temporary Injunction Registered Sale Deed

Shyamsundar Radhyesham Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra

15 Sep 2011 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail in a land forgery case involving long-registered documents and delayed FIR, balancing liberty with investigation safeguards.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail forgery public documents 7/12 extract

Sandeep Thakur v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

07 Sep 2011 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Arif S. Doctor, J
Cites 0 · Cited by 15

The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of UDCPR parking provisions but directed NMMC to conduct a fresh expert study and amend regulations to ensure adequate parking, emphasizing limited judicial interference in subordinate legislation unless manifest arbitrariness is shown.

administrative other Significant Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations UDCPR parking norms subordinate legislation

The State of Maharashtra v. Shri Chandrakant Dhondiram Gurav

16 Aug 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne

The High Court set aside a dismissal order due to unfair departmental enquiry lacking opportunity for cross-examination, directing reinstatement with 50% backwages while emphasizing adherence to natural justice in disciplinary proceedings.

labor petition_allowed Significant departmental enquiry natural justice cross-examination backwages

Yasin Gulab Shikalkar v. Maruti Nagnath Aware & Ors.

01 Aug 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court allowed the petitioner’s writ petition directing re-measurement of disputed land by appointing a Court Commissioner under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, rejecting the res judicata objection and emphasizing the appellate court’s power to admit additional evidence.

civil petition_allowed Significant Court Commissioner Order 26 Rule 9 CPC Order 41 Rule 27 CPC measurement of land

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. v. Supreme Metal Industries

01 Aug 2011 · Amit Borkar
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The High Court held that unauthorized commercial use of electricity in industrial premises attracts mandatory twice-rate penalty under Section 126, and only the registered consumer or authorized person can appeal under Section 127, rejecting tenant's claim to consumer status.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Electricity Act 2003 Section 126 Section 127 unauthorized use of electricity

Raptakos Breet & Company Ltd. v. Gajanan M. Sonawane

24 Jun 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court modified orders awarding back wages to a dismissed employee, directing lump sum compensation instead, affirming limited interference with Labour Court findings under Article 227.

labor appeal_allowed Significant domestic enquiry unfair labour practice back wages dismissal from service

National Iranian Tanker Company v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd

13 Jun 2011 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court upheld an arbitral award holding a demurrage claim time-barred, ruling that correspondence on undisputed invoices did not reset the limitation period under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant demurrage limitation period acknowledgment of liability repudiation

M/s. Satyam Construction v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Ors.

02 Jun 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that stamp duty paid on a Development Agreement is refundable under the extended limitation period of the Proviso to Section 48(1) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, treating such agreements on par with conveyances, and awarded interest on the refund.

tax petition_allowed Significant Development Agreement Stamp Duty Refund Maharashtra Stamp Act Section 47

Darius Rutton Kavasmaneck v. Maharukh Murad Oomrigar & Ors

24 May 2011 · BHARATI DANGRE

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a civil suit challenging a nomination to be tried along with a testamentary suit, holding that the suits involve distinct issues and parties and transfer is not justified under Section 24 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 24 CPC transfer of suit probate proceedings nomination validity

Sanjay Prakash Mane v. The State of Maharashtra

23 Mar 2011 · A. S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court acquitted appellants of murder charges due to unreliable eyewitness evidence but upheld their convictions for attempt to murder, granting benefit of doubt on the more serious offence.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant benefit of doubt eyewitness testimony identification parade Section 302 IPC

Vijay Madhavrao Budhale v. Bhagoji Ganu Kamble

14 Mar 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that a suit for specific performance contingent on government permission is within limitation from refusal after notice, non-joinder of necessary co-owner parties is fatal, possession under Section 53-A requires actual possession per agreement, and directed refund of earnest money with interest while denying specific performance.

civil appeal_partly_allowed Significant specific performance limitation Article 54 Limitation Act non-joinder of necessary parties

Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. v. Union of India

08 Mar 2011 · K. R. Shriram; Neela Gokhale
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment beyond four years is invalid without failure to truly and fully disclose material facts, quashing the reassessment notice issued to Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd.

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

Sailappan Sodali Muthu v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

23 Feb 2011 · Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court quashed a Section 314 notice issued by the Municipal Corporation for failure to specify the statutory contravention, holding such omission renders the notice without jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Section 314 notice jurisdictional requirement contravention specification

Manoj Madhav Limaye & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

18 Feb 2011 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court upheld the municipal corporation's authority to levy regulatory license fees on sky signs and hoardings under the MMC Act post-GST, but struck down retrospective and arbitrary fee increases lacking proper approval.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant license fee sky signs hoardings Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act

Avinash Bharat Ahire v. The State of Maharashtra

29 Jan 2011 · G. S. Kulkarni; Aarti Sathe
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court set aside the Scrutiny Committee's invalidation of the petitioners' Scheduled Tribe claim, directing issuance of caste validity certificates based on substantial documentary evidence and clarifying that the affinity test is not conclusive.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Scheduled Tribe Certificate Caste Validity Certificate Affinity Test Tribe Claim

M/s. IVY Jewellery Pvt Ltd v. Shri Chandresh Sampat

18 Jan 2011 · R. N. Laddha

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused under Section 138 NI Act, holding that without assignment of liability, the accused cannot be held criminally liable for a dishonoured cheque issued by another.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 139 Negotiable Instruments Act dishonoured cheque assignment of debt

Suvarna Netaji Patil v. Smita Ashok Patil

17 Jan 2011 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that a Birth Certificate issued under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act is admissible evidence and that the appointing authority's acceptance of the birth date therein over conflicting school records cannot be interfered with, allowing the appeal and setting aside the earlier decrees invalidating the appointment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Birth Certificate admissibility Section 17(2) Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 35 Indian Evidence Act Date of birth conflict

Dilip Baburao Karape v. The Union of India

14 Jan 2011 · Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal holding that a lost ticket affidavit suffices to prove bona fide passenger status and that injury from falling in a crowded train compartment constitutes an untoward incident entitling the passenger to compensation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant bona fide passenger Railway Claims Tribunal Railways Act 1989 Section 123(c)(2)