High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Surekhaben Chhaniyabhai Varli v. Union of India

12 Mar 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Advait M. Sethna

The Bombay High Court held that the authority must pass and communicate a reasoned order on an application for appointment as a notary, and failure to do so violates natural justice and statutory requirements.

administrative other Significant Notaries Act 1952 Notaries Rules 1956 appointment as notary reasoned order

Hi Style India Pvt. Limited v. Rakesh Corporation

12 Mar 2024 · SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a belated challenge to an arbitral award, holding that limitation under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is strict and the arbitration agreement in an unsigned invoice was valid.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 limitation Arbitration agreement validity Ex parte arbitral award

M/s. Jai Trust v. The Union of India

08 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that transfer of shares by way of gift without consideration is not taxable as capital gains and quashed the reopening notice issued under Section 148 for lack of valid reason to believe income had escaped assessment.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 45 Section 47(iii)

Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income Tax

08 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 7 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that provisions for salary liabilities arising from post-year agreements and exgratia bonus payments beyond statutory limits are allowable deductions under the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act Section 37(1) Section 36(1)(ii) Payment of Bonus Act

Eknath Laxman Shinde v. The State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2024 · A.S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court modified the murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC, holding the accused guilty of causing death with knowledge but without intention, and upheld concurrent sentences under the Bombay Police Act.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 IPC Part-II common intention identification of accused

Sulabai Shamrao Navasare & Ors. v. Balkrishna Namdeo Jadhav & Ors.

08 Mar 2024 · Shivkumar Dige
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal holding the vehicle was insured at the time of the accident and enhanced the compensation payable by the insurer to the claimants.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance coverage RTO records clerical error

AIGP Developers (Pune) Private Limited v. The State of Maharashtra

08 Mar 2024 · B. P. Colabawalla; Somasekhar Sundaresan

The Bombay High Court held that excavation of earth redeployed on the same land for development does not attract royalty or penalty under Section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, quashing the penalty imposed on the petitioner.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant minor minerals excavation royalty penalty

Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise v. Tharwani Infrastructures

08 Mar 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court upheld the CESTAT order dismissing Revenue's appeal, holding that payment of service tax and interest before show cause notice bars invocation of extended period and penalties absent intention to evade tax.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant service tax extended period Section 73 Finance Act 1994 intention to evade

Vishwas Laxman Gadade v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

08 Mar 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Sandeep V. Marne; Jitendra S. Jain
Cites 6 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court Larger Bench held that the first proviso to Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Transfer Act permits continuation of Group-C non-secretariat employees in the same office for six years but does not confer a right to two full tenures on the same post.

labor petition_dismissed Significant transfer of government servants tenure of posting Maharashtra Transfer Act 2005 Group-C employees

Yes Bank Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

07 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Bombay High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment based on a mere change of opinion without new material is invalid, quashing the reopening notice issued against Yes Bank for deduction claimed under Section 36(1)(viia).

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 36(1)(viia) reopening of assessment change of opinion

S. Selvakumari Perulmal v. Kaushal Realtors Pvt. Ltd.

07 Mar 2024 · S. M. Modak

The High Court dismissed the appeal upholding acquittal due to non-issuance of statutory notice to the company, the proper drawer of the cheque, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act statutory notice drawer of cheque company liability

Poonam Rampal Verma v. Mumbai University

07 Mar 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that a University cannot deny a student’s successful course completion and withhold the final mark-sheet based on eligibility objections raised only after the course completion, directing issuance of the mark-sheet and declaration of result.

administrative petition_allowed Significant University admission eligibility criteria writ petition Article 226

Dodal Electro Instruments v. The Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council & Ors.

07 Mar 2024 · N.J. Jamadar · 2025:BHC-AS:40078

The Bombay High Court set aside MSEFC orders for failure to follow mandatory conciliation and arbitration procedures under the MSMED Act and Arbitration Act, remitting the matter for fresh arbitration despite availability of statutory remedies.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 Section 18 MSMED Act Section 19 MSMED Act Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Mangal Kashinath Dabhade v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

06 Mar 2024 · M. S. Karnik · 2024:BHC-AS:11132
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court discharged the applicants from charges of abetment of suicide and caste-based atrocity, holding that mere opposition to marriage without direct instigation is insufficient for conviction under Section 306 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 306 IPC Abetment of suicide Instigation Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

Seetabai Pandharinath Temghare v. Union of India

06 Mar 2024 · Jitendra Jain, J.

The Bombay High Court held that a railway employee travelling on a valid free pass without journey endorsements is a bonafide passenger entitled to compensation for accidental death under the Railways Act, 1989.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Railway Servants Pass Rules 1986 bonafide passenger compensation

Ranjitsinh H. N. Nimbalkar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

05 Mar 2024 · N. J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that mandatory procedural timelines under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 are imperative, a separate license is required for food premises in different areas, and vicarious liability requires clear responsibility, partly allowing the petition and quashing process against some petitioners.

criminal petition_partly_allowed Significant Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 Section 42 procedural compliance Section 77 limitation Food Business Operator license

Kailash Ramchandani v. State of Maharashtra

05 Mar 2024 · Revati Mohite Dere; Manjusha Deshpande
Cites 5 · Cited by 6

The Bombay High Court dismissed bail to an accused in a terrorist blast case, holding that delay in trial alone does not justify bail where prima facie evidence under UAPA and MCOC Act connects the accused to the offence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail UAPA MCOC Act delay in trial

Sakharam Shankar Navasare & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

05 Mar 2024 · GS Patel; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that expert technical reports on building safety by the Technical Advisory Committee are not subject to judicial review on merits and upheld the owner's right to demolish a dilapidated building despite tenants' objections.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Technical Advisory Committee structural stability judicial review writ petition

Milind Patel v. Union Bank of India

04 Mar 2024 · B.P. Colabawalla; Somasekhar Sundaresan
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that banks must provide all relevant material and pass reasoned orders in wilful defaulter proceedings under the RBI Master Circular, ensuring adherence to natural justice and transparency.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant wilful defaulter natural justice RBI Master Circular disclosure of material

Union of India v. S. M. Padwal; Yashwant Balu Lotale v. Union of India

04 Mar 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Arif S. Doctor
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that confessional statements made during criminal investigation are inadmissible in departmental proceedings against employees not tried as co-accused, and disciplinary findings based solely on such statements lack evidentiary basis warranting judicial interference.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental proceedings confessional statements TADA Act judicial review