High Court of Bombay
5,061 judgments
Madhavrao Bhagwatrao Rajebahadur and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
The Bombay High Court directed fresh land acquisition proceedings and compensation assessment under the 2013 Act after quashing an earlier award, ensuring fair compensation to petitioners whose land was utilized by the government.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that possession orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act must be executed promptly without being stalled by third party civil suits, which must be challenged only under Section 17 before the DRT.
Jayant Industries v. Indian Tobacco Company (ITC)
The Bombay High Court dismissed the Plaintiff's copyright and passing off suit under Order XIII-A CPC for lack of real prospect of success due to fabricated evidence and abuse of process, awarding costs to the Defendant.
Oracle Financial Services Software Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of India
The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening of income tax assessment for AY 2014-15, holding that mere change of opinion without tangible material does not justify reassessment under section 147.
Parvathi Venkatesh v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that a government servant discharged without fault before superannuation is entitled to compensation pension under MCS Pension Rules, and arbitrary denial of pension violates constitutional rights.
The State of Maharashtra v. XYZ
The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a child sexual assault case due to contradictions and delays in prosecution evidence, emphasizing that the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mr. Keshar Gopal Singh Thakur
The Bombay High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal, holding that loss of the right eye constituted permanent total disablement for a driver under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, entitling the employee to full compensation.
Sunil Jay Prakash Singh v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that rejection of an SVS Scheme application without granting a personal hearing violates natural justice and directed reconsideration after hearing.
Parag Prakash Mutha v. Kashinath Barku Bhalsingh & Ors.
The High Court set aside the trial court’s order impleading the petitioner’s parents as parties, holding they are not necessary parties under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC as their claims introduce distinct issues unrelated to the suit’s original controversy.
Bhimrao Baharang Chavare v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court set aside an order of the Competent Authority under the Money Lending Act for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the authority cannot order return of vehicles absent proof of illegal money lending and cannot usurp criminal court jurisdiction over seized property.
Yakinali Nasirali Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, rejecting the defense of transferred malice and affirming the sufficiency of eyewitness and forensic evidence.
Haresh Narendra Gharat v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court acquitted the appellant of murder due to failure of prosecution to prove his presence at the crime scene and incomplete circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the mandatory legal principles governing burden of proof and benefit of doubt.
State of Maharashtra v. Singarasingh Sarvansingh
The High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of accused due to inconsistencies between oral and medical evidence and lack of independent corroboration.
Vikram Trimbak Pawar v. Technocrat Construction
The High Court held that a defendant can challenge conditional leave to defend in a substantive appeal and that deposit made before appellate court for stay can satisfy trial court's condition, remanding the suit for trial upon further deposit.
Alphonso D’Souza v. Apex Grievances Redressal Committee
The Bombay High Court held that the AGRC lacked original jurisdiction to entertain the 3rd respondent's application and set aside its order, directing the parties to resolve contractual disputes in civil courts.
Gunvant Rohidas Bansode v. State of Maharashtra
The High Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges due to failure of prosecution to establish a complete and conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence excluding all reasonable doubt.
Janardan Trimbak Wagh v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court modified a murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the reliability of the dying declaration and absence of premeditation.
Kanaka Kedar Sapre v. Kedar Narhar Sapre & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that applications under the Domestic Violence Act cannot be filed on behalf of a deceased aggrieved person, as the rights under the Act are personal and extinguish upon death.
Hareshwar Harischandra Mistry v. Pravin B. Nayak
The High Court enhanced compensation for permanent disability in a motor accident claim by applying the multiplier method and ordered interest from an earlier date, emphasizing just and detailed assessment under recognized heads of damages.
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Rama Vishram Gavas
Dependents of a deceased borrower-driver are not entitled to compensation under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as the borrower is deemed to be in the shoes of the owner and not a third party.