High Court of Bombay
3,981 judgments
Schaeffler India Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
The Bombay High Court held that stamp duty is chargeable only on the NCLT Mumbai order sanctioning a composite scheme of amalgamation and not on underlying transactions or separate NCLT Chennai orders, quashing the excess stamp duty demand.
Ms. Heena Qasim Phoplunkar v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing MPSC to include the petitioner in the merit list, holding that a clerical error in the EWS certificate's financial year, clarified by the issuing authority, does not invalidate the certificate.
Raghav Rajesh Aggarwal v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR and charge-sheet alleging rape on false promise of marriage where the relationship was consensual and the complainant was married, holding no offence was made out under Section 376(2)(n) IPC.
Municipal Corporation, Pune v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that candidates selected as Assistant Teachers on an unaided basis cannot be validly appointed as Shikshan Sevaks on honorarium, quashing such appointment orders and directing fresh appointments with pay scale.
Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation v. M/s. Bombay Gymkhana Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that in absence of an express limitation period under the ESI Act, orders imposing damages under Section 85-B must be passed within a reasonable period of five years, and set aside a damages order passed after fourteen years as time-barred.
Jitendra Gorakh Megh v. Gorakh Govind Megh
The Bombay High Court held that Section 105 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 cannot be misused as a litigation tactic to challenge an adversary's legal capacity without proper proof of mental illness and dismissed the Interim Application accordingly.
Yakub Salebhai Contractor & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that failure of the planning authority to acquire reserved land within statutory timelines after a purchase notice leads to automatic lapse of reservation under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, entitling the landowner to develop the land.
Gaurav Rajeshbhai Desai; Chirag Rajeshbhai Desai; Mitul Ramanbhai Desai v. Yagyanarayan Prabhunath Mishra; Shikshan Prasaran Samiti; The Education Welfare Society
The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and granted interim injunction restraining respondents from creating third-party rights in disputed property pending final adjudication, emphasizing maintenance of status quo in property disputes.
Shri Vinay Krishnadas Shah v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that statutory MEPS Rules mandating 33% reservation prevail over conflicting Government Resolutions, and directed approval of the petitioner’s appointment as Headmaster where reservation could not be applied to two posts.
Ecogreen Envirotech Solutions Ltd. v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of a tender bid for failure to meet prescribed financial criteria, ruling that the tendering authority’s uniform application of accounting standards excluding OCI was lawful and not arbitrary.
Mr. Narendra Singh Chawara v. Mrs. Hemangini Kumari Prithvi Raj
The Bombay High Court allowed minor clerical corrections in a testamentary petition order by substituting incorrect place names and correcting spelling errors through an application for speaking to the minutes.
Multi Commodity Exchange of India Ltd v. Mediacom Communication Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the dismissal of MCX's suit for recovery against Mediacom Communication Pvt. Ltd., permitting amendment to implead related entities, and holding that summary rejection under Order VII Rule 11 was premature without trial or evidence.
Maheshkumar Gordhandas Garodia v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging the Collector's order transferring possession of salt pan lands to MMRDA for Metro Line-6, holding that serious title disputes require civil adjudication and the petitioner has no subsisting lease rights.
Mrs. Kiran Bhalchandra Bramhane v. The Chief Executive Officer
The Bombay High Court held that stoppage of one annual increment with cumulative effect is a major penalty requiring departmental inquiry and modified the penalty to withholding increment for one year without cumulative effect.
Pawan Rajaramrao Kadam v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of a State Government Notification permitting utilisation of TDR on payment of premium under the MRTP Act, dismissing challenges of arbitrariness and violation of statutory and constitutional provisions.
Vikram Kashinathrao Khutwad v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging the delimitation and reservation rules for local body elections, holding that such matters are barred from judicial interference during the election process under constitutional provisions.
Rahul Ravindra Barai v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of three accused for kidnapping, sexually assaulting, and murdering a minor girl, relying on strong circumstantial and direct evidence including mobile phone records and forensic analysis.
A. Navinchandra Steel Private Limited v. V.N. Lothey
The Bombay High Court upheld the jurisdiction of an arbitrator under the MSCS Act for recovery disputes by a multi-state co-operative bank, holding that such proceedings coexist with remedies under the RDB Act and Sarfaesi Act.
Acme Housing India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that exemption orders under Section 20 of the ULC Act survive repeal and are valid unless formally cancelled, upholding mutation entries reflecting such exemption and dismissing the petitioners' challenge.
Om Vishwashanti CHS v. Mumbai Municipal Corporation
The High Court upheld the cancellation of the NOC issued to developers for a slum rehabilitation project on municipal land, affirming the landowner's preferential rights and the municipal corporation's authority to revoke permissions for non-compliance.