High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Nanji Dana Patel v. State of Maharashtra

27 Aug 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that delay in filing refund applications for stamp duty beyond six months can be condoned under the Limitation Act, and the State cannot retain stamp duty collected twice on the same property, directing reconsideration of the refund on merits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant stamp duty refund Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 limitation period Section 48(1)

Jagannath Anna Gavade & Ors. v. Shashikant Bhupal Khandekar & Ors.

27 Aug 2024 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident death claim by applying the correct multiplier based on the deceased's age and recognizing the deceased's daily wage income despite employer's labor law non-compliance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim multiplier factor age of deceased filial consortium

The Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1(3)(1)

26 Aug 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court quashed a reassessment notice issued after four years for lack of failure to disclose material facts and held that mere change of opinion by the Revenue does not justify reassessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Reassessment Failure to disclose material facts

Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra

26 Aug 2024 · G.S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that without a specific Section 13 notice, the 120-day period for landowners to submit redevelopment schemes does not commence, affirming the landowner's preferential redevelopment rights and quashing the AGRC order rejecting their proposal as belated.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Slum Areas Act Section 13(1) Section 14 slum rehabilitation area

Mujibur Rehman Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui v. Noorjahan Begum Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui & Ors.

26 Aug 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court upheld the substitution of legal heirs and executor as plaintiffs in a family property declaratory suit after the original plaintiff's death, holding that such substitution does not alter the suit's nature or cause of action.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant substitution of legal heirs Order 22 Rule 3 CPC Section 213 Succession Act executor under Will

Kunal Housewares Private Limited v. Union of India

26 Aug 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that exporters claiming higher drawback must refund the differential amount before receiving IGST export refund, preventing double benefit under GST and Customs laws.

tax appeal_allowed Significant IGST refund drawback zero rated supplies Section 16(3)(b) IGST Act

Surel Milk & Food Processor Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Bhagwan Krishna Pawar & Ors.

26 Aug 2024 · Milind N. Jadhav

The High Court held that appointment of a Court Commissioner for property survey cannot be made at the initial stage before evidence is led, and such appointment is discretionary after assessing evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Court Commissioner Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC mandatory injunction encroachment

State of Maharashtra v. Shashikant Dnyanu Jadhav

26 Aug 2024 · S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of a police constable accused of accepting a bribe, holding that circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove demand and acceptance under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7 Section 13(1)(d) demand and acceptance

Haresh Panchal Alias Harish Vallabhbhai Naroliwala v. Leela Chandrakant Naik

26 Aug 2024 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court upheld eviction on grounds of rent arrears, unauthorized subletting, and illegal construction, affirming that rent must be deposited before framing of issues under Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rent Act to avoid eviction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Bombay Rent Act Section 12(3) eviction arrears of rent

M/s. Tolani Ltd. v. The DCIT Spl. Range-31 Mumbai

23 Aug 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that the deduction under Section 33AC must be reduced from profits of a ship before computing the Section 80-I deduction, dismissing the assessee's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 33AC Income-tax Act Section 80-I Income-tax Act deduction computation profits and gains from ship

Karunakar Shetty v. Shanta Chandappa Alva

23 Aug 2024 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that a petition for declaration of sole ownership of property jointly held by spouses is not barred by omission to include such claim in an earlier divorce petition, as the causes of action are distinct.

family appeal_allowed Significant Order 2 Rule 2 CPC cause of action family court property dispute

Aashish Niranjan Shah v. Union of India

23 Aug 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court quashed reassessment proceedings initiated beyond four years where the petitioner’s returns had been scrutinized and no failure to disclose material facts was demonstrated, affirming the strict jurisdictional limits under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reassessment

Yogesh Ramdas Bachhav v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Aug 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Prithviraj K. Chavan

The Bombay High Court upheld the appellant's conviction and life sentence for the murder of Jyotsna, attempt to murder her friend, and attempt to commit suicide, based on credible eyewitness and forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed murder attempt to murder attempt to commit suicide Indian Penal Code

Abhijit Arjun Padale v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Aug 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court held the petitioner’s arrest illegal for non-compliance with Sections 41 and 41A CrPC and Supreme Court guidelines, ordered compensation and departmental inquiry, affirming the protection of fundamental rights against unlawful arrest.

criminal petition_allowed Significant illegal arrest Section 41 CrPC Section 41A CrPC Article 21

Wintry Engineering And Chemicals Private Limited v. The Commissioner of Local Body Tax Department

22 Aug 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that under Section 406(8) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, only the disputed tax amount, and not interest or penalty, must be deposited for an appeal to be entertained against Local Body Tax demands.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Local Body Tax Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 Section 406(8) disputed tax

Joseph Paul de Sousa v. The State; Zinnia M. Khajotia; The Regional Passport Office, Mumbai

21 Aug 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that offensive emails can constitute an offense under Section 509 IPC and Section 67 IT Act, refusing to quash the FIR except for allegations under Sections 354 and 506(2) IPC.

criminal petition_partly_allowed Significant Section 509 IPC Section 67 IT Act outraging modesty electronic communication

Rohit Satindra Sharma v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Aug 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Dr Neela Gokhale · 2023 INSC 687
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court quashed criminal proceedings for sexual harassment, holding that the FIR was frivolous, contradicted by ICC findings, and instituted with malafide intent.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC sexual harassment POSH Act

Madhukar Baburao Shete v. Yogesh Trimbak Shete

20 Aug 2024 · Gauri Godse J
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The High Court held that a Lok Adalat Award passed without a valid court reference under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and without proper jurisdiction is illegal and set aside the Award, restoring the suit for regular adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Lok Adalat Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 Section 20 reference compromise pursis

Crimeophobia v. Ministry of Animal Husbandry and Dairy Development and Ors.

19 Aug 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court dismissed a frivolous and omnibus PIL petition lacking legal basis and imposed costs, emphasizing that PILs must be grounded in legal rights and not personal opinions or State policy matters.

constitutional petition_dismissed Public Interest Litigation writ of mandamus omnibus petition abuse of process

Payal Hariom Verma v. The State of Maharashtra

19 Aug 2024 · SARANG V. KOTWAL; S.M. MODAK

The Bombay High Court held that arresting a woman after sunset without prior magistrate permission under Section 46(4) Cr.P.C. is illegal and ordered her release on bail while allowing re-arrest only with due procedure.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 46(4) Cr.P.C. illegal arrest arrest after sunset prior magistrate permission