High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Prajakta Siddhesh Paralkar v. Siddhesh Paralkar

16 Sep 2025 · Madhav J. Jamdar

The Bombay High Court upheld orders directing the husband to deposit half the sale proceeds of a shared flat into court, condemned his misleading conduct, and warned of contempt proceedings for non-compliance.

family appeal_dismissed Significant family court temporary injunction sale consideration deposit in court

Shri Satish Mahadeo Rupwate v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

16 Sep 2025 · Gauri Godse

The High Court upheld eviction of ex-municipal employees from staff quarters held on leave and licence basis, rejecting claims of ownership conversion and protection under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant leave and licence tenancy municipal staff quarters eviction under MMC Act Section 53-A Transfer of Property Act

Globotrans Prologistix Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

16 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that the unilateral withdrawal of a Customs Broker License without following prescribed revocation procedures and principles of natural justice was illegal and restored the license to the petitioner.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Broker License Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2018 withdrawal of license natural justice

Sharavan @ Rahul Ashok Burungale v. State of Maharashtra

16 Sep 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale

The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order due to contradictory English and Marathi grounds that violated the detainee's right to effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant preventive detention Article 22(5) Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act discrepancy in grounds of detention

Romell Housing LLP v. Sameer Salim Shaikh & Ors.

16 Sep 2025 · Amit Borkar

The High Court restored the Magistrate's order recognizing the applicants' actual possession under Section 145 CrPC, holding that possession inquiries are summary and preventive, not requiring strict evidentiary standards or title adjudication.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 145 CrPC possession dispute summary inquiry forcible dispossession

Haribhau Dnyandev Chemte v. The State of Maharashtra

16 Sep 2025 · Madhav J. Jamdar, J.

The Bombay High Court rejected anticipatory bail to the accused in a case involving a forged court order used to obtain bail, holding that the police station investigating the related criminal proceedings has jurisdiction and Section 215 BNSS does not bar FIR registration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail forgery fabricated court order jurisdiction

The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital

15 Sep 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The court held that consultant doctors are independent professionals attracting TDS under Section 194J, not salary under Section 192, and remanded the AMC TDS issue for fresh factual determination by the ITAT.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 192 Section 194C Section 194J

Avanika Films LLP v. Abhay Verma

15 Sep 2025 · Prafulla S. Khubalkar

The Bombay High Court refused interim injunction enforcing a negative covenant restraining an actor from working elsewhere post-termination of the contract, holding such enforcement impermissible as specific performance of personal service contracts is prohibited and damages are the appropriate remedy.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant negative covenant interim injunction personal service contract specific performance

Sayeeda Shabbir Mukadam v. The State of Maharashtra

15 Sep 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhad

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition alleging encounter killing by Excise officers, holding the death accidental and emphasizing the necessity of full disclosure and credible evidence in writ jurisdiction.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 writ petition encounter killing illegal liquor trade

Jyoti Abhijeet Kandage v. Abhijeet Narayan Kandage

15 Sep 2025 · Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that Domestic Violence proceedings can be transferred from Magistrate's Court to Family Court and allowed the wife's application to transfer such proceedings to the Family Court at Kolhapur considering convenience and statutory provisions.

family appeal_allowed Significant Domestic Violence Act, 2005 transfer of proceedings Family Court jurisdiction Magistrate Court

Riyaz @ Bablu Sattar Mujawar v. The State of Maharashtra

15 Sep 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; Shyam C. Chandak

The High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to unreliable eyewitness testimony, doubtful dying declaration, and flawed weapon recovery, holding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC eyewitness reliability oral dying declaration recovery of weapon

The Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mumbai v. Parle Products Ltd.

12 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that freight charges reimbursed by purchasers under ex-factory contracts do not form part of the sale price and are not subject to sales tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant sales price freight charges ex-factory delivery Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959

Vaibhav Maruti Dombale v. The Assistant Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai

12 Sep 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that the ITAT cannot recall its final order under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act based on a subsequent Supreme Court ruling, limiting rectification powers to mistakes apparent from the record existing at the time of the original order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 254(2) Income Tax Act mistake apparent from record subsequent ruling rectification powers

Heena Mohammeddin Kashmiri v. State of Maharashtra

12 Sep 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court directed expeditious execution of a 2012 recovery certificate under the Consumer Protection Act, holding that unreasonable delay and pendency of delayed appeals cannot justify postponement of execution proceedings.

consumer_protection petition_allowed Significant Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Execution of recovery certificate Unreasonable delay in execution Collector's duty

Feroz Khaja Mohammad Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra

12 Sep 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld a preventive detention order under the MPDA Act, holding that procedural safeguards were complied with and the detention was justified to maintain public order.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant preventive detention MPDA Act Article 22 Advisory Board

Asian Paints Limited v. Competition Commission of India & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Neela Gokhale
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the CCI's administrative order directing investigation against Asian Paints, holding that Section 26(2-A) does not bar entertaining new complaints on different facts and no prior hearing is required at the prima facie stage.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Competition Commission of India Section 26(1) Competition Act Section 26(2-A) Competition Act Abuse of dominance

Sagar Dattatray Chorghe v. The State of Maharashtra

11 Sep 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that in-service teachers who acquired TET qualification before the Supreme Court judgment are entitled to continue service and promotion, quashing transfer refusals and salary withholding based on prior non-possession of TET.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Teacher Eligibility Test Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act TET qualification In-service teachers

Shabana Rashid Pinjari v. Maharashtra Public Service Commission

11 Sep 2025 · M. S. Karnik; N. R. Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that the Disabilities Act mandates proactive reasonable accommodation and reservation for visually impaired candidates, allowing writ jurisdiction to enforce these rights when alternative remedies fail justice.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 reasonable accommodation reservation for persons with disabilities Article 226 Constitution of India

City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Limited v. Deepak D. Patil & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Amit Borkar, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Court’s finding that CIDCO committed unfair labour practices by denying permanency to long-serving firemen and drivers engaged on repeated fixed-term contracts, emphasizing substance over form in employment classification.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant unfair labour practice permanency temporary appointment Model Standing Orders

GEA Westfalia Separator India Private Limited v. SVS Aqua Technologies LLP

10 Sep 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court held that challenges to arbitral awards under the MSMED Act must be filed in courts having jurisdiction over the place where the statutory arbitration was conducted, dismissing petitions filed in Mumbai for lack of jurisdiction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 MSMED Act Section 18 MSMED Act Section 34 Arbitration Act