High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Echjay Industries Pvt Ltd. & Ors. v. Mr. Rajendra & Ors.

10 May 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court quashed search and seizure under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act for lack of credible reason to believe, emphasizing strict compliance with procedural safeguards and non-disclosure of satisfaction notes to the assessee at the search stage.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 132 Income Tax Act search and seizure reason to believe satisfaction note

Vidya Rajaram Bandiwadekar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

10 May 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The High Court held that the Deputy Charity Commissioner cannot adjudicate membership validity under Section 41-A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, and set aside directions restricting election participation and amendment of bye-laws based on such findings.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Section 41-A Section 50-A membership validity

Shri Shripad Dwarkanath Gupte & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

10 May 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Arif S. Doctor, J.

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the grade-wise promotion policy of Artisan Staff in Naval Dockyard Mumbai, upholding the validity of combined seniority promotions and rejecting claims of prejudice and delay.

administrative petition_dismissed Artisan Staff Promotion policy Trade-wise seniority Grade-wise seniority

Maharashtra State Board for Technical Education v. Taramati Santosh Taji

10 May 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld the setting aside of a probationer's stigmatic termination order issued without enquiry, directing reinstatement and completion of probation.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant termination of probationer stigmatic termination enquiry before termination natural justice

Eshtiyaq Ahmed Mushtaq Ahmed Qureshi v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.

10 May 2024 · N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed an externment order for lack of objective material supporting the requisite subjective satisfaction under section 57(1)(a)(i) of the Maharashtra Police Act, emphasizing that mere conviction is insufficient to justify externment.

criminal petition_allowed Significant externment order Maharashtra Police Act 1951 section 57(1)(a)(i) subjective satisfaction

Ulhas Shikshan Sanstha Classic Heights v. Laxman Dagdu Mhaske

10 May 2024 · Gauri Godse

The court upheld that a valid appointment to Head Master cannot be invalidated by a pre-appointment statement of unwillingness or non-approval by the Education Officer, and an illegal reduction in rank without following procedure is liable to be set aside.

labor petition_dismissed Significant MEPS Act Head Master appointment Reduction in rank Approval by Education Officer

Kores (India) Ltd. v. Ashish Kumar Ahooja

10 May 2024 · S. M. Modak
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal of Kores India Ltd., holding that the accused failed to rebut the presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheques issued towards payment for goods supplied.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 Section 139 presumption of liability

M/s Bhavsar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Oyster Shipmanagement Private Limited

09 May 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court upheld the lawful compromise between plaintiffs and developers disposing of a suit, dismissing appellants' challenge that the consent terms prejudiced their rights under a joint venture agreement.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Consent Terms Joint Venture Agreement Letters of Allotment Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act

Deelip Tatoba Raje v. The State of Maharashtra

09 May 2024 · S. M. Modak
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court set aside a sexual offence conviction relying solely on Section 164 statements and corroborative evidence when the victim and witnesses turned hostile, emphasizing strict adherence to evidentiary principles.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant hostile witness Section 164 CrPC statement corroborative evidence medical evidence

Indirabai Narayan Bivalkar and Ors v. Yadav Ganpat Mhatre and Ors

09 May 2024 · Gauri Godse

The High Court set aside the MRT order restoring fixation of purchase price in favor of respondents claiming tenancy rights, holding that final rejection of tenancy claims precludes such fixation and ordering inquiry into alleged fraud and forgery.

property appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 Section 70(b) Section 32G Section 76A

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. M.B. Kolhe

08 May 2024 · Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court allowed MSRTC's writ petition, setting aside orders reinstating a driver dismissed for rash driving causing death and fleeing the accident spot, holding dismissal justified and penalty not shockingly disproportionate.

labor appeal_allowed Significant dismissal proportionality of penalty rash and negligent driving fleeing accident spot

Shaikh Masud Ismail Shaikh & Ors. v. The Union of India & Ors.

08 May 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Arif S. Doctor, J
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the State Government's notifications renaming Aurangabad and Osmanabad cities and revenue areas, ruling that the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code's procedural requirements do not apply to city renaming and no fundamental rights were violated.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant renaming of cities Maharashtra Land Revenue Code Section 4 MLRC fundamental rights

Imran Humayun Chandiwala v. The State of Maharashtra

08 May 2024 · N.J. Jamadar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court allowed the writ petition restoring vehicle registration cancelled on the basis of forged documents, holding that an innocent purchaser complying with Settlement Commission orders cannot be penalized disproportionately.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 55(5) Customs Act, 1962 Settlement Commission

Hindustan Export & Import Corporation Private Limited v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

07 May 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act where the appellant failed to prove furnishing of commercial knowledge or technical services beyond sharing newspaper cuttings, affirming the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction to verify compliance despite prior approval of the agreement.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 80-O Income Tax Act deduction under Section 80-O approval of agreement Assessing Officer jurisdiction

Prasad Dattajirao Patil v. M/s. Chaudhary Construction Company & Ors

07 May 2024 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court set aside the Trial Court's order allowing amendment to implead the petitioner personally as defendant, holding that such amendment was barred by limitation and changed the suit's nature impermissibly.

civil petition_allowed Significant Order VI Rule 17 CPC Order I Rule 10(2) CPC amendment of plaint trustee liability

Chiplun Sand Mining & Trading Corporation v. The State of Maharashtra

07 May 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that the State cannot unilaterally apply a revised sand mining policy to contracts executed under an earlier policy, affirming the principle that contractual terms cannot be altered without mutual consent.

administrative petition_allowed Significant promissory estoppel contract modification government resolution sand mining policy

Naresh Govind Vaze v. High Court of Bombay; Government of Maharashtra

07 May 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld procedural Rules regulating parties appearing in person, holding they are reasonable, valid, and do not violate constitutional rights.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant party-in-person fundamental rights Article 19(1)(a) High Court procedural rules

Abhijit S. Shingote v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

07 May 2024 · A.S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing repatriation of a minor child to the USA with her father, emphasizing the child's best interest over parental claims and recognizing the limited enforceability of foreign custody orders in India.

family appeal_allowed Significant child custody habeas corpus best interest of child parental abduction

Sonalkumar Sureshrao Salunkhe & Ors. v. The Assistant Controller of Patents

06 May 2024 · Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that an order deeming a patent application abandoned under Section 21(1) of the Patents Act is not appealable under Section 117A, dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

intellectual_property petition_dismissed Significant Patents Act, 1970 Section 21(1) Section 15 Section 117A

Shubham Sunil Pore v. The Union of India

06 May 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld the decision to drop an ambiguously advertised petrol pump dealership location, holding no enforceable right arose from selection by draw of lots and dismissing the writ petition.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition dealership selection draw of lots advertisement ambiguity