High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Shantanu Bhopale v. The Union of India

02 May 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; M.M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court dismissed the IIT aspirant's petitions challenging his JEE (Mains) score and debarment for unfair means, upholding the NTA's evaluation and denying relief.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant JEE Mains 2025 score-card manipulation unfair means debarment

Neelam Rajendra Nanaware v. The State of Maharashtra

02 May 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court's rejection of the appellant's discharge application under section 227 CrPC in a financial fraud case, holding that a prima facie case exists against her as Additional Director for misappropriation of investors' deposits under the MPID Act and IPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 227 CrPC Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 Criminal breach of trust Fraudulent default

M/s. Barkat Contractors Pvt. Ltd. & M/s. Ratnaprabha Facility Services LLP v. Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation

30 Apr 2025 · Alok Aradhe, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J.

The Bombay High Court upheld the disqualification of petitioners from a municipal tender for submitting a joint bid prohibited under tender conditions and dismissed their challenge to the award to another bidder despite allegations of forged documents.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender process joint venture partnership firm disqualification

Jayashree Tanaji Salunkhe v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Apr 2025 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that the petitioner’s participation in the All India Agricultural Inter-University Sports Competition qualifies her for 5% reservation under the Government Resolution, quashing the cancellation of her eligibility certificate as arbitrary and unlawful.

administrative petition_allowed Significant eligibility certificate sports reservation government resolution inter-university sports competition

Ankush Kashinath Mhaske v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Apr 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; M.M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court allowed a writ petition partially, directing a fresh inquiry into the petitioner's entitlement to refund for un-excavated sand due to villagers' opposition under the applicable Government Resolution.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant sand excavation refund claim Government Resolution 12.03.2013 clause 17-C-(15)

The State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Mrs. Aruna P. Katke

30 Apr 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; M.M. Sathaye

The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order reinstating a dismissed temporary medical officer, holding that dismissal was justified and punishment was not disproportionate given the gravity of misconduct and parity with similarly placed delinquents.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental enquiry punishment parity temporary employee dismissal judicial review of punishment

Municipal Council Ratnagiri v. Madhukar Shankar Redij

30 Apr 2025 · Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court upheld that failure to acquire reserved land within the statutory period under Section 127 causes automatic lapse of reservation, and Civil Courts retain jurisdiction to declare such lapse despite the bar under Section 149 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant reservation lapse Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act Section 127 Section 149

Javed Akhtar Basiulla Ansari v. The State of Maharashtra

30 Apr 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction for kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A IPC based on credible victim testimony and corroborative evidence, dismissing the appellant's appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping for ransom Section 364A IPC injured eyewitness testimony extortion

Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. v. Maha Active Engineers India Pvt. Ltd.

30 Apr 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; Rajesh Patil

The Bombay High Court partly allowed ABL's appeal modifying the interim relief granted under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, emphasizing the need for expedition, prima facie case, and reasoned quantum in granting such relief.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 9 Arbitration Act interim relief prima facie case balance of convenience

Anilkumar Chhotelal Yadav & Nagendrakumar Lalkrishor Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra

29 Apr 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of two appellants for murder and robbery based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence including last seen theory and corroborative recoveries.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory Section 302 IPC Section 392 IPC

Umabai Dattu Bhoir and Ors. v. Malati Kisan Bhagt and Ors.

29 Apr 2025 · Gauri Godse

The Civil Court has jurisdiction to try suits for declaration of title despite existence of heirship certificates under the Bombay Regulation and Indian Succession Act, and a plaint cannot be rejected at the threshold on that ground.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant heirship certificate Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 Indian Succession Act, 1925 Civil Court jurisdiction

N.M.V. High School and College & Ors. v. Shri Bharat Dagadu Kshirsagar & Ors.

29 Apr 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

The Bombay High Court quashed an unreasoned administrative order rejecting a teacher's full-time appointment approval and directed retrospective approval with salary and pension arrears.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant administrative approval reasoned order application of mind resolution

UTO Nederland B. V. v. Tilaknagar Industries Ltd.

28 Apr 2025 · Alok Aradhe, CJ; M. S. Karnik, J; Shyam C. Chandak, J
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The court held that an order on a temporary injunction application is a discretionary order, not a prima facie adjudication, and appellate interference is limited to cases of arbitrary or perverse exercise of discretion.

civil other Significant temporary injunction prima facie adjudication discretionary order scope of appeal

Vincy Cajetan Noronha & Ors. v. Steffi Genovevo Fernandes

28 Apr 2025 · R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court appointed the Respondent as legal guardian of minor Master Yohan, prioritizing the child's welfare and emotional bonds over financial capacity or biological ties.

family petition_allowed Significant Guardianship Custody Welfare of child Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

Shahna Garg Advani v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

28 Apr 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court dismissed the mother's habeas corpus petition for custody of her 10-year-old son, holding that the father is the natural guardian and custody disputes require detailed inquiry under guardianship laws with the child's welfare as paramount.

family petition_dismissed Significant habeas corpus child custody natural guardian Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956

Sahil Raju Gilani v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

28 Apr 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition seeking custody of a minor girl, holding that custody disputes must be resolved under the Guardians and Wards Act with the child's welfare as paramount.

family petition_dismissed Significant habeas corpus child custody Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 welfare of the child

Indorama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. The Union of India & Ors.

25 Apr 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that a manufacturer-exporter is entitled to claim both input side drawback and output side rebate on exported goods without it constituting double benefit, overruling the Department's recovery demand.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Cenvat credit drawback rebate Rule 18 Central Excise Rules 2002

Sasmita Investments Ltd. v. Appropriate Authority

25 Apr 2025 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

Civil courts lack jurisdiction to entertain suits challenging or seeking declaration of abrogation of compulsory purchase orders under Chapter XX-C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as barred by Sections 269-UN and 293.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Chapter XX-C Compulsory Purchase Order Section 269-UD

M/s. Manidhari Realtors Private Limited & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

25 Apr 2025 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that in NHAI land acquisitions, interest on delayed compensation must be paid from the date possession is taken, directing payment of interest at 9% per annum from 05.12.2019 until actual payment.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition possession date interest on compensation Section 80 of 2013 Act

Usha Ravi v. Bank of Baroda & Ors.

25 Apr 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

Deputation allowance paid during deputation does not form part of pensionable pay; pension must be fixed on substantive pay drawn in the parent bank excluding deputation allowance.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant deputation allowance pension fixation parent bank loanee bank