High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

M/S. MRJS Lead Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

26 Aug 2025 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging GST adjudication orders and notices under Section 74 of the CGST Act, holding that alternate statutory remedies must be exhausted and notices issued within the limitation period under Section 73 are valid despite absence of fraud allegations.

tax petition_dismissed Significant CGST Act Section 73 Section 74 writ jurisdiction

Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Raigad

26 Aug 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that interest income earned on fixed deposits maintained for mandatory business obligations and interest on TDS refunds are eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, affirming the requirement of a direct nexus between such income and the eligible business.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 80IA Income Tax Act interest income deduction fixed deposits eligible business

Jijau Coop. Housing Soci. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra

26 Aug 2025 · Amit Borkar, J.

The Bombay High Court held that removal of a cooperative housing society's managing committee under Section 78A requires clear grounds, meaningful consultation, and proper procedure, setting aside the impugned supersession orders for lack of these safeguards.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Section 78A Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act Supersession of managing committee Cooperative housing society Meaningful consultation

Pushpanjali Consumer Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. The Union of India & Ors.

25 Aug 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petitioners' challenge to the CSD's rejection of their bank guarantee exemption requests, holding that the policy's eligibility criteria must be strictly followed and courts will not read into the policy provisions not expressly stated.

administrative petition_dismissed bank guarantee exemption Canteen Stores Department government policy discretionary power

Vikas Kumar Gupta @ Vicky v. Union of India

25 Aug 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition holding that the petitioner’s arrest and detention complied with constitutional safeguards and procedural requirements under the NDPS Act.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant illegal arrest delayed production Article 21 Article 22

The Board of Mumbai Port Authority v. DSV Gerimal

22 Aug 2025 · Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court allowed the Plaintiff's application to amend the Plaint to introduce documents not initially disclosed but produced in response to the Defendant's case, balancing procedural rules with the need to determine the real controversy.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XI Rule 1 CPC Order VI Rule 17 CPC Commercial Courts Act 2015 amendment of pleadings

Shree Gurukrupa SRA Co-op Hsg Sty v. Minister of State, Home (Rural) Housing School

22 Aug 2025 · G.S. Kulkarni; Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court upheld the lawful inclusion of adjoining plot occupants in a slum rehabilitation scheme, directed issuance of necessary approvals, and restrained political interference obstructing the project's implementation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Circular No. 144 Development Control and Promotion Regulations 2034 Letter of Intent

M/s. H. G. Mehta & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

22 Aug 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand

The Bombay High Court directed Customs authorities to provide certified copies of documents originally handled by the petitioner to enable defense against PMLA charges, emphasizing the right to a fair trial and access to evidence.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act Customs Duty Bills of Entries Right to defense

Rameshchandra Shobhnath Mishra v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Aug 2025 · S.M. Modak

The Bombay High Court set aside the trial court's order rejecting the petitioner's application to try an absconding accused together without verifying chargesheet status, remanding the matter for fresh consideration and holding the imposition of costs and liberty threats unjustified.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 223 Cr.P.C. absconding accused chargesheet verification imposition of costs

Anil Bhausaheb Patil & Ors. v. Sangli Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd

21 Aug 2025 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court dismissed revision applications upholding eviction decrees against tenants for unlawful subletting disguised as partnership, default in rent payment, and bona fide requirement of premises by the landlord.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant unlawful subletting partnership agreement forfeiture of tenancy default in rent payment

Murlidhar Bhikoba Salunkhe & Ors. v. M/s. Advani Oerlikon Limited

21 Aug 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand

The Bombay High Court held that retrenchment of long-serving workers requires proof of just cause beyond procedural compliance, and ordered partial back wages where reinstatement was not feasible.

labor appeal_allowed Significant retrenchment Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25F back wages

Santosh Sham Kotewad v. The State of Maharashtra

20 Aug 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court acquitted three accused of murder due to failure of the prosecution to prove their identity beyond reasonable doubt, citing inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony and procedural lapses in the test identification parade.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant identity of accused ocular evidence test identification parade Section 164 CrPC statement

Pravin Dashrath Sawnt v. The State of Maharashtra & Vikas Sitaram Bankar

20 Aug 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Gautam A. Ankhand

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR alleging cheating in loan sanction, holding that the FIR prima facie discloses a cognizable offence and investigation must proceed.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 420 IPC Section 34 IPC Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR

Premsukh Kisandas Kataria v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

20 Aug 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Rajesh S. Patil · 2025:BHC-AS:35826-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed a delayed and contradictory FIR alleging rape and atrocities under the SC/ST Act, holding it to be mala fide and inherently improbable.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 376 IPC Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act mala fide prosecution

Rohit Mohan Pugalia v. Purvi Rohit Pugalia

19 Aug 2025 · Kamal Khata · 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2719

The Bombay High Court allowed transfer of a domestic violence case to the Family Court to consolidate it with pending matrimonial proceedings involving common issues, promoting judicial efficiency and avoiding conflicting orders.

family appeal_allowed Significant transfer of proceedings domestic violence family court Section 24 CPC

apl12352025 e8d96829

19 Aug 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court limited judicial work hours, adjourned certain civil appellate matters, and extended interim protections until the next hearing.

procedural other Procedural interim protection adjournment judicial work limitation court schedule

caf4862017 9c232341

19 Aug 2025 · M. M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court adjourned listed civil appellate matters due to paucity of time and ordered continuation of existing interim orders.

civil other Procedural adjournment interim orders ad-interim orders civil appellate jurisdiction

Ganesh Kumar Yadav v. R. Tamil Selvan

18 Aug 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed an election petition for failure to plead material facts demonstrating that alleged non-disclosures materially affected the election result, emphasizing strict compliance with statutory pleading requirements under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Election Petition Representation of the People Act, 1951 Section 100(1)(d)(iv) Section 83(1)(a)

Hilla Homi Dadysett alias Hilla H. Dadysett v. Hoshang Jehangir Khan

14 Aug 2025 · Kamal Khata

The Bombay High Court allowed an application under Section 340 CrPC to initiate a criminal inquiry into the forgery of a purported Will filed by a caveator lacking any legal interest, holding that no prior hearing is required before such inquiry.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 340 CrPC Section 195 CrPC Forgery Probate

Shamgonda Shidgonda Patil v. Shivgonda Babgonda Patil

14 Aug 2025 · Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court allowed the second appeal holding that the 1957 partition deed executed by a paternal grandfather as natural guardian was invalid, the suit for partition was within limitation, and the properties were joint family properties entitled to partition and separate possession.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partition joint family property natural guardian minor