High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Hanuman Jairam Naik v. The State of Maharashtra

25 Feb 2025 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the demolition of an illegally constructed property, holding that illegality in construction is incurable and fundamental rights do not protect unauthorized acts.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant illegal construction demolition fundamental rights Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act

Ajay Shankar Rathod v. Zilla Parishad, Satara & Ors.

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

The Bombay High Court held that suspicion without evidence cannot justify disqualification in examinations and quashed the direction for a mock test, directing appointment of the petitioner based on his original score.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant unfair examination practices presumption of innocence CCTV footage examination malpractice

Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Panchamrut CHS Ltd.

24 Feb 2025 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court upheld a unilateral deemed conveyance order under MOFA, holding that disputes over title and subdivision must be resolved by civil courts, and dismissed the writ petition challenging the conveyance.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 deemed conveyance Competent Authority Section 11 MOFA

Khurshed Rustom Engineer v. Ajita Ranjit Madhavji & Ors.

24 Feb 2025 · Madhav J. Jamdar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction decrees based on bonafide requirement under the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, allowing consideration of subsequent events post-Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, but set aside decrees based on acquisition of alternate premises due to lack of proof.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant bonafide requirement Bombay Rent Act, 1947 Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 subsequent events

Shree Doodhganga Vedhganga Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Mangoli v. State of Maharashtra

24 Feb 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court allowed approval of a Junior Clerk appointment in an aided private school despite procedural irregularities in recruitment, protecting the selected candidate's rights while imposing costs on the management.

administrative petition_allowed Significant aided private schools non-teaching staff recruitment Article 16 appointment approval

Pandurang Shripati Magadum v. Rajaram Ragho Taware & Ors.

24 Feb 2025 · Bharati Dangre; Shyam C. Chandak

The High Court quashed the FIR against the petitioner for procedural irregularities and lack of proper application of mind by the Magistrate in ordering investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC after cognizance and investigation under Section 202 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC taking cognizance Section 200 CrPC Section 202 CrPC

Kishore Mohanlal Dingra v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

24 Feb 2025 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that adjusting a tax refund against a pending demand is illegal once 20% of the demand is paid and the appeal is pending, directing refund and expeditious disposal of the appeal.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax refund adjustment Assessment year 2014-15 Assessment year 2016-17 Section 143(3) Income Tax Act

Om Developers v. Bernardine Mouad Herique

23 Feb 2025 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

The Bombay High Court held that rejection of a Section 16 application cannot be challenged via a Section 37 petition against a Section 17 interim order and refused to interfere with the arbitral tribunal’s interim relief.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 16 application Section 17 interim order Section 37 challenge

M/s. Pyramid Developers v. Union of India

21 Feb 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that a non-banking financial company not meeting prescribed asset thresholds is not a "financial institution" under the SARFAESI Act and thus cannot invoke Section 14, issuing a writ of Prohibition to restrain proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14 financial institution secured creditor

Suyash Suryakant Patil v. National Medical Commission

21 Feb 2025 · A.S. Chandurkar; M.M. Sathaye
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that functional competency assessment governs eligibility for medical education and PwD reservation, directing restoration of admission despite disability exceeding 40%.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant disability certification functional competency PwD reservation medical education eligibility

M/s. Vaishnavi Engineers and Developers Private Limited v. Navnath Ramkrishna Mhatre and Others

21 Feb 2025 · N. J. Jamadar

The High Court held that a plaintiff has an absolute right to unconditionally withdraw a suit and set aside the trial court's order condoning a 9-year delay in seeking recall of such withdrawal without sufficient cause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant withdrawal of suit Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC condonation of delay recall of order

Parvath Shetty v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

21 Feb 2025 · Sandeep V. Marne

Managing committee members without ownership or MHADA-approved membership in a cooperative housing society can be validly removed under Section 78A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act for acting prejudicially to the society's interests.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 Section 78A Managing Committee Removal Society Membership Validity

Watergrace Products v. Nashik Municipal Corporation

20 Feb 2025 · Alok Aradhe, CJ; Bharati Dangre, J

The Bombay High Court struck down arbitrary tender conditions requiring reduced experience and excessive net worth, directing the municipal corporation to reframe them in conformity with CVC guidelines and Article 14.

administrative petition_allowed Significant tender conditions arbitrariness Article 14 judicial review

Veer Tower Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City (4) & Ors.

18 Feb 2025 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that a co-operative housing society is entitled to deemed conveyance under Section 11 of the MOFA Act despite redevelopment delays and incomplete federation formation, directing the Competent Authority to issue conveyance accordingly.

property appeal_allowed Significant deemed conveyance Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 Section 11 MOFA redevelopment delay

Farooq Yasin Sayyad Inamdar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

18 Feb 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice issued by the Waqf Board CEO, holding that such a challenge is premature absent exceptional circumstances and that an effective alternate remedy exists.

administrative petition_dismissed Show Cause Notice Waqf Act 1995 Article 226 Maintainability of writ petition

Ramesh Bagaram Mankane & Hemant Bagaram Mankame v. Vasant Dattatray Pawar & Ors.

18 Feb 2025 · Gauri Godse

The Bombay High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding that tenancy land transfers require prior statutory sanction and confirmed plaintiffs' possession and title, rejecting defendants' claims based on agreements and possession receipt.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 Section 43 bar on transfer Section 53A Transfer of Property Act possession receipt

Shri Sanjay Bhavsingh Patil v. The State of Maharashtra

17 Feb 2025 · Ravindra V. Ghuge; Ashwin D. Bhobe

The Bombay High Court held that prolonged suspension without timely enquiry is unjustified and ordered reinstatement of an employee facing charges of submitting contradictory medical certificates.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant suspension departmental enquiry medical certificate visual impairment

Ex-LT Col PK Tiwari v. Union of India

17 Feb 2025 · Revati Mohite Dere; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of an Army officer for aggravated sexual assault under POCSO, affirming the scope of judicial review over court martial proceedings limited to fundamental rights violations and jurisdictional errors.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant court martial judicial review Article 226 Army Act 1950

Ganesh Madhukar Mendarkar v. The State of Maharashtra

14 Feb 2025 · Milind N. Jadhav
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court granted bail to an undertrial accused after over nine years of incarceration, emphasizing the constitutional right to speedy trial and the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail long incarceration speedy trial Article 21

Kiran Anna Chavan v. State of Maharashtra

14 Feb 2025 · Sarang V. Kotwal; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court set aside a detention order under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 due to contradictions, unexplained delay, and malafide conduct affecting the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction.

criminal petition_allowed Significant detention order Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 habitual offender subjective satisfaction