High Court of Bombay
5,131 judgments
M/s. Rajaram Construction v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging disqualification from a tender for non-compliance with bid capacity requirements, holding that judicial interference is unwarranted absent mala fide or arbitrariness, especially after the petitioner withdrew an earlier suit on the same cause.
Gagan Satyapal Khanna v. Union of India
The High Court held that an appellate authority must provide an opportunity to cure shortfall in mandatory pre-deposit before dismissing an appeal, setting aside the dismissal order and remanding the matter for fresh consideration.
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Kekanaje Balkrishna Bhat
The Bombay High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, upholding the tribunal's award of compensation to claimants in a motor accident death case where death causation was probable and breach of policy was unproven.
Abhijit Bhagwat Khedkar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the review petition challenging denial of Ph.D. admission, holding that new grounds cannot be raised in review and eligibility relaxation must follow applicable regulations.
Shahaji Nanai Thorat v. Sanjay Dina Patil
The Bombay High Court dismissed an election petition for failure to implead all contesting candidates as mandated by Section 82 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, holding that such non-compliance is a fundamental defect that cannot be cured by subsequent amendment or summons issuance.
Shahid Akeel Shaikh v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court allowed admission to a PwD candidate despite an inadvertent error in the NEET application, emphasizing correction of bona fide mistakes and protection of disability rights under the RPwD Act, 2016.
Shri Vasant Buddhiram Gonte v. State of Maharashtra
The court held that a unilateral declaration by a promoter under the Apartment Act without all flat purchasers' consent is invalid, allowing the formation and registration of the co-operative housing society under MOFA.
Santosh Madhukar Bhondve v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the allotment of Gairan land for affordable housing under PMAY, holding that the State Government's overriding power under Section 40 of the MLRC and the Development Plan under the MRTP Act prevail over prohibitions on diversion of Gairan land.
Ramesh Krishna Gopnur v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for sexually assaulting five minor girls, relying on consistent victim and eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and statutory presumption under the POCSO Act.
Balkrishna Dadoba Yedekar & Ors. v. Sangli Municipal Council
The Bombay High Court upheld the termination of Petitioners' tenancy rights on municipal land exempted from the Tenancy Act under Section 88(1)(b), holding that Section 4B does not protect tenancy once land is exempted, and dismissed writ petitions challenging the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal's order.
Bhushan Vora v. The Union of India
The Bombay High Court quashed a Show Cause Notice issued under the Customs Act due to an eight-year delay in adjudication and failure to inform the petitioner about transfer to the call book, holding such delay and non-communication violate natural justice and justify writ relief.
Suresh Vamanrao Gaikwad v. M/s. Karva Developers & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking impleadment of a third party purchaser in a specific performance suit, holding that such impleadment would impermissibly enlarge the suit's scope and that the petitioner was not a bonafide purchaser due to a cancelled Power of Attorney and knowledge of pending litigation.
M/s. Trishul Construction Co. v. City Industrial and Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that the State Government's communication dated 1st August 2018 is a binding directive under Section 154 of the MRTP Act, and stayed CIDCO's cancellation of allotment pending the State Government's final clarification.
Dr. Chetna Rajput v. Modern Education Society
The Bombay High Court directed prompt payment of delayed gratuity with interest and expedited processing of pension benefits to a retired teacher, holding the delay unjustified and arbitrary under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
The Deputy Commissioner of Police v. Shri Sanjay Govind Parab
The Bombay High Court held that a government servant who disobeys a transfer order after refusal of interim relief cannot claim pay for the period of unauthorized absence even if the transfer order is later set aside on procedural grounds.
Daulat Nagar, Borivali (East), Mumbai v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court transferred the murder investigation of ex-Corporator Abhishek Ghosalkar to the CBI, finding lapses in the police probe and emphasizing the need for a fair, impartial, and comprehensive investigation.
Jayant Sanjeeva Shetty v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court rejected bail for a Managing Director accused of illegally accepting public deposits and diverting funds, holding that prima facie offences under IPC and MPID Act are made out given the scale, entrustment, and risk of interference with justice.
Dhanashri Ramesh Karkhanis v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Bombay High Court held that contractual employees fulfilling eligibility criteria are entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, and quashed the denial of such benefits to the petitioner.
Volvo Group India Pvt Ltd v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that writ petitions challenging orders of the Revisionary Authority under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act are maintainable before it since the appellate order forms a significant part of the cause of action arising within its jurisdiction.
Miss XYZ v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court allowed a minor sexual assault victim to choose medical termination or continuation of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks based on Medical Board opinion, emphasizing her reproductive autonomy and directing comprehensive medical and legal support.