High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Rupali Ramesh Desai v. M/s. Padmavati Housing Corporation & Ors.

18 Jul 2024 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that limitation issues are to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal and appointed an arbitrator while allowing joinder of third party transferees in arbitration proceedings.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration Limitation Bar Arbitral Tribunal Jurisdiction Third Party Joinder

Jafar @ Chikna Jafar Mohammad Khan Deshmukh v. State of Maharashtra

16 Jul 2024 · Sarang V. Kotwal

The Bombay High Court set aside the convictions of two accused under IPC and MCOCA for chain snatching due to failure of prosecution to prove identity, unreliable recovery, inadmissible confession, and lack of corroboration.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant chain snatching identity of accused confession MCOCA

Siddhartha Sudhir Moravekar v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office

16 Jul 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Arun R. Pedneker

The Bombay High Court quashed a Look Out Circular against a cooperating accused, holding that LOCs cannot be issued routinely and must respect the fundamental right to travel under Article 21.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Look Out Circular LOC Article 21 fundamental right to travel

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. M/s. Jindal Polyfilms Ltd.

16 Jul 2024 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld CGRF orders directing MSEDCL to refund excess electricity charges with interest, affirming the applicability of limitation and statutory interest under the Electricity Act.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Electricity Act, 2003 Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum Additional Energy Charges

M/s. Krishna Constructions v. Mr. Subhash Uttam Dalvi

16 Jul 2024 · Gauri Godse

The court upheld the interim injunction restraining the promoter from carrying out additional construction without valid informed consent under MOFA, emphasizing the promoter's obligation of full disclosure and balancing the rights of flat purchasers.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act MOFA informed consent additional construction

Momin Moiuddin Gulam Hasan & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

15 Jul 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Gauri Godse
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that extension of time to file chargesheet solely on the ground of awaiting sanction under UAPA is illegal, entitling accused to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant extension of time chargesheet default bail Section 167(2) CrPC

Huhtamaki India Limited v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

15 Jul 2024 · B. P. Colabawalla; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that the one-time premium under the ULC Act Government Resolutions can only be charged on surplus exempted vacant land and ordered refund of excess premium paid on the entire land.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Urban Land Ceiling Act one-time premium surplus exempted vacant land Government Resolution

Benaifer Vispi Patel v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Palghar & Ors.

15 Jul 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court quashed a Section 148 notice issued on defective electronic information under the faceless scheme, holding that the Assessing Officer must verify and apply mind before dispensing with procedural safeguards under Section 148A.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act Section 135A Income Tax Act faceless assessment

Amol Gajanan Kirtikar v. Ravindra Dattaram Waikar

15 Jul 2024 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that an election petition lacking a concise statement of material facts demonstrating material effect on election result under Sections 100(1)(d)(iii) and (iv) of the RP Act is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Election Petition Representation of People Act, 1951 Section 100(1)(d)(iii) Section 100(1)(d)(iv)

Ganatra Hotels Private Limited & Ors. v. Kiran Ranchodas Ganatra & Anr.

12 Jul 2024 · R.I. Chagla J

The Bombay High Court upheld the arbitral award granting monetary exit to the Ganatra Group, holding that the award was not contrary to public policy and the Ganatras were ready and willing to perform their contractual obligations.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 public policy readiness and willingness

Rajshekhar Udayprasad Singh v. The State of Maharashtra

12 Jul 2024 · A.S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Section 306 IPC for abetment of suicide due to insufficient evidence of instigation and mens rea, holding that mere harassment without active provocation does not constitute abetment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant abetment of suicide Section 306 IPC instigation quashing of FIR

Nilesh Balkrishna Rode v. Suvarna Nilesh Rode & State of Maharashtra

12 Jul 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court quashed criminal proceedings under POCSO and IPC against a father, holding the allegations inherently improbable and the prosecution mala fide, thus preventing abuse of process of law.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR abuse of process inherent improbability POCSO Act

M/s. Autopet; Shweta Jayprakash Singh v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

11 Jul 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court quashed the arbitrary termination of a petroleum dealership by BPCL where seals were intact and no proof of tampering was found, restoring the petitioners' dealership and supply.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant dealership termination arbitrariness natural justice writ jurisdiction

Chhagan Ramchandra Pondkule v. Dhanaji Dinkar Jadhav

11 Jul 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that the Competent Authority rightly declined to refer a dispute over compensation apportionment to the Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, as no prima facie dispute over entitlement existed.

property petition_dismissed Significant National Highways Act, 1956 Section 3H(4) land acquisition compensation apportionment

Dr. Deelip Mhaisekar v. Dr. Ajay Sahebrao Chandanwale & State of Maharashtra

11 Jul 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Rajesh S. Patil

The High Court allowed the writ petition, holding that additional charge does not confer legal right, estopping the senior officer from challenging long-accepted administrative orders, and restored the petitioner to hold additional charge till superannuation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant additional charge administrative exigency estoppel seniority

Adarsh Bharat Enviro Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

11 Jul 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Amit Borkar, J.

The Bombay High Court held that a bidder debarred on the tender submission date and failing mandatory pre-qualification criteria is ineligible, quashing the tender committee's decision allowing such bidder to participate.

administrative petition_allowed Significant tender process pre-qualification criteria debarment blacklisting

Surekha Luxman Sonovane v. The State of Maharashtra

10 Jul 2024 · Nitin Jamdar; M. M. Sathaye

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking damages for medical negligence but directed the State to mandate and monitor adequate first aid and medical facilities in educational institutions.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant medical negligence educational institutions first aid facilities writ jurisdiction

Vrindavan CHSL v. State of Maharashtra

10 Jul 2024 · B. P. Colabawalla; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Government Resolutions fixing lease rent based on Ready Reckoner land values, rejecting challenges of arbitrariness and violation of lease terms.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant lease rent fixation Government Resolution Ready Reckoner Article 14

Regional Director, ESI Corporation v. M/s. Pahelvi Bakery

10 Jul 2024 · ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Cites 2 · Cited by 3

The Bombay High Court held that storing yeast in a domestic refrigerator does not constitute a manufacturing process aided by power under the ESI Act, dismissing the ESIC’s appeal for retrospective coverage.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 manufacturing process use of power refrigerator

Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Dinendra Ratansi & Ors.

10 Jul 2024 · Arun R. Pedneker
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that an occupier/director is not personally liable for ESIC dues of the company unless he has ultimate control over the factory, and ESIC dues must be recovered from the company or its assets.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees State Insurance Corporation occupier liability ESIC dues recovery principal employer