High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Anisa Arashad Diwan v. The State of Maharashtra

22 Feb 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed a writ petition quashing cancellation of an OBC candidate's engineering admission due to delay in submitting caste validity certificate, holding the delay was not attributable to her and the college's conduct implied waiver.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Caste Validity Certificate Admission cancellation Reservation OBC category

Arrow Engineering Limited v. Punit Jitendra Chande & Anr.

21 Feb 2024 · R.I. Chagla

The Bombay High Court set aside multiple arbitration awards for lack of reasoned decisions and held that contracts lacking certainty of property description are unenforceable, claims barred by limitation, and readiness to perform unproven, thereby allowing the Petitioner’s challenge.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration award specific performance certainty of property description limitation

Administrative Council Walchand College of Engineering v. State of Maharashtra

21 Feb 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that the Administrative Council is the lawful managing body of Walchand College of Engineering, quashing government nominations to a rival governing body constituted by the parent society.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Administrative Council Walchand College of Engineering control and management governing body

M/s. Jagruti Foundation v. The State of Maharashtra

21 Feb 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld the State's discretionary grant and refusal of Letters of Intent for new colleges under the MPU Act, ruling the decision-making process was reasonable and not arbitrary.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Letter of Intent Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 1960 Section 109 judicial review

Mr A.B.C. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

21 Feb 2024 · M.S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Section 376 IPC alleging rape based on a promise of marriage, holding that mere breach of promise without dishonest intent does not vitiate consent and the proceedings were instituted with ulterior motives.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 376 IPC quashing of FIR false promise of marriage consent vitiation

Sudhir Santuji Murkute v. State of Maharashtra

20 Feb 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that a long-serving employee cannot be denied pension and retirement benefits on procedural grounds raised post-retirement, affirming pension as a statutory right protected under Article 21 and legitimate expectation doctrine.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pension retirement benefits legitimate expectation Article 21

Ashwini Sanjay Kale & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

20 Feb 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that age relaxation under Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008 applies only to recognized backward classes and not to Economically Weaker Section candidates, dismissing their claim for appointment as judicial officers.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008 age relaxation Economically Weaker Section backward classes

Shri Yogesh Rajendra Mehra v. Principal Commissioner CGST & Central Excise Raigad

20 Feb 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition directing refund of tax mistakenly deposited under a cancelled GST registration and held that procedural deficiencies cannot render an appeal barred by limitation if filed online within time.

tax petition_allowed Significant GST refund cancelled registration tax deposited under cancelled GST number appeal limitation

Salasar Estate Developers LLP v. Rufina Walter Gomes & Ors.

20 Feb 2024 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court set aside injunctions restraining development on ancestral property, holding that long-standing mutation entries and possession by one branch create a strong prima facie title against late challenges by other heirs who suppressed material facts.

civil appeal_allowed Significant mutation entry ancestral property temporary injunction family arrangement

Varsha Kapil Doshi v. State of Maharashtra

20 Feb 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court quashed the recovery of increments paid beyond five years and near retirement, holding such recovery impermissible and emphasizing equitable balance per the Supreme Court’s Rafiq Masih precedent.

administrative petition_allowed Significant recovery of increments Marathi Language Examination Rules 1987 State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih equitable balance

Om Impex v. The State of Maharashtra

20 Feb 2024 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court held that revocation of voluntary GST registration cancellation without prior notice or hearing violates natural justice and quashed the retrospective cancellation orders.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant voluntary cancellation of GST registration revocation of cancellation principles of natural justice show cause notice

Green Garden Apartments Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. Nitin Chaudhari and others

20 Feb 2024 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that sale of TDR by a cooperative housing society was authorized and valid despite internal irregularities and non-registration, dismissing the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Transferable Development Rights TDR Development Rights Certificate Temporary Injunction

Anurag Ravindra Umaley v. State of Maharashtra

16 Feb 2024 · M. S. Karnik · 2024:BHC-AS:7872
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that mere promise of marriage does not vitiate consent under Section 90 IPC unless it is shown that the accused never intended to marry, and discharged the accused from rape charges for lack of prima facie evidence of absence of consent.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant consent misconception of fact promise of marriage Section 90 IPC

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd v. The State of Maharashtra

16 Feb 2024 · M.S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors must be heard by the NCLT where insolvency proceedings against the principal corporate debtor are pending, setting aside the DRT's order and directing transfer of proceedings to the NCLT.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 National Company Law Tribunal Debt Recovery Tribunal Personal guarantor insolvency

Kinjal Jayesh Mehta v. Disha Jimit Sanghvi

14 Feb 2024 · Sharmila U. Deshmukh

The Bombay High Court held that a married sister-in-law residing separately in her own matrimonial house does not have a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person under the D.V. Act and cannot be made a respondent in a domestic violence application.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 domestic relationship shared household Section 2(f) D.V. Act

Raviprakash Chaturdeo Patel v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

14 Feb 2024 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Arif S. Doctor

The Bombay High Court held that CIDCO was not obligated to accept the highest bid in its e-tender and that its rejection of the petitioner's bid was neither arbitrary nor unfair, dismissing the writ petition.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant e-tender highest bidder arbitrariness natural justice

Shivraj Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. v. Mextech Realty Pvt. Ltd.

14 Feb 2024 · Amit Borkar

The Bombay High Court held that the statutory restriction on shareholding under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act does not apply to housing societies governed by Chapter XIII-B, and dismissed the petition challenging membership conferment to a company purchasing multiple bungalows.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 Section 28 Chapter XIII-B housing societies

Ashok Chaganlal Thakkar v. National Faceless Assessment Centre

13 Feb 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that rural agricultural land classification under Section 2(14)(iii) does not require actual agricultural activity and remanded the matter for fresh assessment after proper verification of evidence and mandatory personal hearing.

tax appeal_allowed Significant agricultural land capital asset capital gains tax Section 2(14)(iii)

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Dastagir Naalsab Mulani

13 Feb 2024 · Sandeep V. Marne

The Bombay High Court held that the disciplinary authority lacked power under the original Regulation 7 to impose cumulative effect on penalties of withholding increments or reduction of pay, dismissing the MSRTC's writ petitions challenging Labour Court orders.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Discipline and Appeal Procedure Regulation 7 withholding increments reduction of pay

Nusli N. Wadia; Maureen N. Wadia; Rajesh Batra v. Bastion Constructions

13 Feb 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Kamal Khata
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court dismissed the application to admit additional evidence at the appellate stage in a specific performance suit, holding that possession is ancillary and the application was an abuse of process intended to delay the decree.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order 41 Rule 27 CPC additional evidence specific performance possession