High Court of Bombay

3,981 judgments

Year:

Nileshkumar Jashvantsinh Parmar & Ors. v. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha & Ors.

20 Jul 2026 · S.M. Modak

The Bombay High Court held that an amendment application based on a new cause of action arising during trial can be allowed without applying the due diligence test under Order VI Rule 17 CPC and dismissed the petition challenging such amendment.

civil petition_dismissed Significant amendment of plaint Order VI Rule 17 CPC due diligence new cause of action

Rohit Dewan v. Syndicate Bank

12 Jul 2026 · Dipankar Datta, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that an employee can validly withdraw resignation before it becomes effective upon expiry of the notice period, and directed reinstatement of the petitioner whose resignation withdrawal was unlawfully rejected.

labor petition_allowed Significant resignation withdrawal notice period service regulations Syndicate Bank

Rajani Dattaram Tanawade & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.

18 Jun 2026 · Sunil B. Shukre; Rajesh S. Patil
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court held that tenants in redevelopment schemes are entitled to full 35% fungible FSI over 300 sq.ft carpet area, directed additional parking allotment, and ordered reconsideration of amenity space reduction.

property appeal_allowed Significant fungible FSI rehabilitation flats Development Control Regulations 1991 carpet area entitlement

Kamlakar Motiram Satve and Anr. v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

07 Jun 2026 · S.V. Gangapurwala, ACJ; Sandeep V. Marne, J

The Bombay High Court condoned developers' delay in completing flats under the Powai Area Development Scheme, recorded compliance with interim orders, lifted restrictions on further development, and disposed of related public interest litigations.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Powai Area Development Scheme Tripartite Agreement interim orders condonation of delay

Purple Products Private Limited v. Union of India

01 Jun 2026 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that the Customs Authorities have jurisdiction under the Customs Act to adjudicate alleged misrepresentation in imports without first resorting to the treaty-based dispute resolution mechanism under Article 24 of AIFTA, which is not incorporated into Indian law.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 28 ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement Article 24

Indiabulls Infraestate Ltd. v. Imagine Realty Pvt. Ltd.

10 May 2026 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court held it has jurisdiction to extend the arbitral tribunal's mandate under Section 29-A, refused to substitute the arbitrator for alleged delay and bias, and extended the mandate by six months.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 29-A Arbitration and Conciliation Act extension of arbitral mandate substitution of arbitrator jurisdiction of court

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central 4 v. Citron Infraprojects Limited

30 Apr 2026 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna · 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2772

The Bombay High Court upheld the ITAT's quashing of prior approvals under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act due to total non-application of mind, invalidating reassessment proceedings under Section 153A and dismissing the Revenue's appeals.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 153D Income Tax Act prior approval non-application of mind Section 153A Income Tax Act

Nitin Rajendra Gupta v. Deputy Collector, Mumbai

09 Apr 2026 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that under Section 23(1) of the Senior Citizens Act, the condition of providing basic amenities to a senior citizen need not be expressly stated in a gift deed but can be established by evidence, while also clarifying that the Tribunal erred in ordering possession without considering co-ownership.

family appeal_allowed Significant Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 Section 23(1) Gift Deed annulment Basic amenities and physical needs

Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay v. Tanaji Babaji Lad & Ors.

03 Apr 2026 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held IIT Bombay liable to pay gratuity to contract laborers engaged through multiple contractors, affirming the Controlling Authority's jurisdiction to determine employer-employee relationship under the Payment of Gratuity Act.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 employer-employee relationship contract labor principal employer

Madhuri Dnyaneshwar Khandeshe v. State of Maharashtra

23 Mar 2026 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The court upheld the Education Officer's order applying the 2023 Notification to determine seniority, holding that Suresh's seniority dates from his B.A. degree in 1996 due to retroactive application of amended MEPS Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant seniority MEPS Rules Category C D.Ed qualification

Ravikiran Vasant Gore v. M/s. Sainath Enterprises Partnership Firm & Ors.

18 Mar 2026 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging the appellate court’s order lifting the temporary injunction restraining development of disputed property, holding that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case and balance of convenience for interim relief.

civil petition_dismissed Significant temporary injunction gift deed revocation of will property dispute

Supriya Chokhara v. Union of India

01 Mar 2026 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that Customs authorities lack jurisdiction to restrict transfer of property owned by a third party based on investigation against her husband, and such ownership disputes must be adjudicated by civil courts.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act jurisdiction benami property prohibition of benami transactions property ownership dispute

Asha Dhondiram Shinde v. Union of India

27 Feb 2026 · R.I. Chagla; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition of a visually impaired candidate, directing reconsideration of her candidature with reasonable accommodation under the RPwD Act, quashing her rejection based on non-recognition of her educational qualification equivalence.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant reasonable accommodation Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 equivalence of educational qualification disability rights

AIC246 AG & Co. KG v. The Patent Office of India

27 Feb 2026 · Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court held that a patent applicant must be granted a mandatory hearing under Section 14 before refusal under Section 25(1), affirming the distinct and independent nature of examination and opposition proceedings under the Patents Act.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Patents Act, 1970 Section 14 hearing Section 15 order Section 25(1) pre-grant opposition

GTL Limited v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

27 Feb 2026 · SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ; GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR against GTL Limited for alleged loan diversion, holding that absent prima facie evidence of fraud or identified accused, the investigation cannot proceed.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC economic offences cheating under IPC

GTL Infrastructure Limited v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

27 Feb 2026 · Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ; Gautam A. Ankhand, J

The Bombay High Court quashed the FIR against GTL Infrastructure Limited for lack of prima facie evidence of fraud or criminal misconduct, emphasizing the limits on investigative powers and protection of bona fide commercial decisions.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Prevention of Corruption Act section 17A forensic audit corporate debt restructuring

Parshuram Govind Patil v. State of Maharashtra

26 Feb 2026 · Manish Pitale; Shreeram V. Shirsat

The Bombay High Court held that CIDCO cannot mandate probate of will under its policy when the law does not require it, quashing the impugned condition and directing allotment of developed plots without probate.

administrative petition_allowed Significant probate of will Indian Succession Act 1925 CIDCO 12.5% scheme administrative policy

Mohan Gangaram Narang v. City and Industrial Development Corporation Ltd

26 Feb 2026 · N. J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed a writ petition directing a decree on admission to declare forged conveyance deeds void, emphasizing the Court's discretionary power under Order XII Rule 6 CPC to grant speedy relief on clear admissions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC judgment on admission decree on admission forgery

Gerald Michael Misquitta v. State of Maharashtra

25 Feb 2026 · Neela Gokhale
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The High Court held that all co-owners must be given a fair opportunity of hearing before the Competent Authority grants a unilateral deemed conveyance certificate under MOFA, and quashed the impugned order and deed for failure to do so.

property appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 Unilateral Deemed Conveyance Competent Authority Natural Justice

Pradip Prakash Baikar v. State of Maharashtra

25 Feb 2026 · R.M. Joshi

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a man for sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the weight of the victim's testimony and the applicability of statutory presumptions despite minor discrepancies and absence of definitive medical injuries.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act sexual assault minor victim testimony medical evidence