High Court of Bombay
4,240 judgments
Dr. Vilas Gangadhar Mamde v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that a professor entitled to extended service must be paid salary for the period he was prevented from working due to delayed issuance of the extension order.
Babaso Ganpatil Awate v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that 50% of part-time service must be counted towards pension qualifying service and directed payment of pension benefits with interest for delay under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules.
Ananda Ramchandar Salunkhe v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation
The High Court upheld the dismissal of a MSRTC conductor after finding the domestic enquiry fair and evidence sufficient despite non-examination of the passenger, dismissing the writ petition challenging the disciplinary action.
Bank of Baroda v. Geeta Smruti Premises Co-operative Society Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that a purchaser of premises against whom a recovery certificate is issued has locus to file revision under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and quashed the dismissal of such revision for want of locus.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai v. Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust – Shirdi
The Bombay High Court held that a trust established for both religious and charitable purposes is exempt from tax on anonymous donations under Section 115BBC(2)(b) despite registration under Section 80G.
Kishor Sitaram Dongardive v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation
The Bombay High Court quashed termination orders passed without due process and directed fresh show cause notices and hearings before finalizing termination of municipal school teachers.
Sayali Shivaji Sable v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that siblings cannot hold different Scheduled Tribe certificates and quashed the rejection of the petitioner’s claim, directing issuance of the validity certificate.
wp67952023 3a48ed39
The Bombay High Court held that omission of CGST Rules 89(4B) and 96(10) without savings clause lapses pending proceedings under them and declared these rules unconstitutional and ultra vires.
Varun Dhupe; Suresh Dhupe; Vibhavari Dhupe v. The State of Maharashtra; Sanjiv Ukey
The Bombay High Court refused to quash an FIR alleging mental cruelty and abetment to suicide under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC, holding that a prima facie case exists requiring investigation and trial.
Adithya Krishnan v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court refused to quash rape proceedings where sexual intercourse was induced by a false promise of marriage made with no intention to fulfill it, holding the consent vitiated by misconception of fact.
Vinisha Sawant v. Mahendra Sawant & The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that a Magistrate cannot order FIR registration under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after taking cognizance and directing inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., and quashed the FIR accordingly.
Nayeem Akhtar Gouse Mohiuddin Sherpyade v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing approval of the petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak, holding that procedural lapses in recruitment did not invalidate the selection.
Savita Kamlakar Pingale v. Directorate of Art
The Bombay High Court held that an employee retiring voluntarily from a grant-in-aid arts institution is entitled to pensionary benefits including service during non grant-in-aid periods, with statutory interest on delayed payments.
Sukhraj B. Nahar Charitable Trust v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
The Bombay High Court held that stamp duty on a rectification deed is payable only on the excess area beyond the original leased land, quashing the demand for duty on the entire increased area post subdivision/amalgamation.
Darshan Singh Parmar v. The Union of India & Ors.
The Bombay High Court directed payment of a determined reward to an informer whose information led to tax recoveries, emphasizing fair and timely implementation of government reward schemes.
Nandkumar Infrastructure LLP v. The Superintendent Engineer National Highway Division, Pune
The Bombay High Court held that the experience of a proprietor can be reckoned as the experience of an LLP for tender eligibility, set aside the rejection of the petitioner's bid, and directed re-opening of financial bids and re-negotiation.
Lalit Timothy D’Souza v. Lawra D’Souza
The Bombay High Court appointed the Court Receiver as joint Administrator pendente lite alongside the incarcerated executor to preserve and manage the deceased's estate pending final testamentary proceedings.
Sarita Rahul Sharma v. Rahul Udayraj Sharma
The Bombay High Court allowed the wife's plea to transfer matrimonial proceedings to a more convenient family court due to her hardship in traveling with an infant, rejecting the husband's offer to bear travel costs and imposing exemplary costs on him.
Jayashree Gangadhar Hiremath v. Nirmala Gangadhar Hiremath
The Bombay High Court upheld that the first wife is the sole legal heir entitled to family pension despite the deceased's nomination of the second wife, as the second marriage was void due to subsistence of the first marriage.
Uma Niwas Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. The Collector of Stamps
The Bombay High Court held that a demand for deficit stamp duty raised beyond the six-year limitation period under Section 53A of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 is barred and quashed the impugned orders accordingly.