Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Union of India v. Central PWD Engineers Association
The Delhi High Court set aside a CAT order promoting engineers based on a fictitious 1977 Notification, remanding the matter for fresh consideration excluding reliance on that Notification.
Suprabha Nitesh Patil v. Nitesh Gajanan Patil
The Bombay High Court held that under Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, a later matrimonial petition must be transferred to the court where the earlier petition is pending for joint disposal, overriding discretionary transfer powers under Section 24 CPC.
M/s. Mathuresh Infrapro Pvt Ltd. v. M/s. Chudiwala Company
The Court held that a suit seeking restitution or relief obtainable by application under Section 144 CPC is barred if filed as a fresh suit, and clever drafting to circumvent this bar warrants rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Soli Behram Sukhadwala v. Nitin D. Sohni & Ors.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the revision application, holding that the applicant failed to prove he was a family member residing with the deceased tenant under Section 5(11)(c) of the Bombay Rent Act, and thus was not entitled to tenancy rights.
Narayan Bhau Salve v. Khandu Baburao Salve
The court held that dismissal of appeals for default does not amount to a decree and does not affect the enforceability date of the trial court decree for limitation of execution under Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Pankaj Subhash Tatar v. The State of Maharashtra
Costs of a preliminary inquiry under Section 83 cannot be recovered from persons exonerated in subsequent proceedings under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.
New Sonal Industries Premises Ltd. v. District Deputy Registrar (2) & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that under MOFA, a promoter must convey leasehold rights over the entire land as per the agreement, and the Competent Authority cannot limit conveyance based on FSI utilization when the agreement provides for full conveyance.
Chandrakant C. Patel and Others v. Suryakant Shivlal Parmar and Others
The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of Defendants as mere licensees, holding they failed to prove exclusive possession required for protected tenancy under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act.
Vakamulla Chandrashekhar & Ors. v. Registrar of Companies
The Delhi High Court held that subordinate courts lack jurisdiction to restore complaints dismissed for non-appearance, quashing the restoration and summons orders in a Companies Act offence case.
Shri Shivam Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Vileparle Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that the Competent Authority under MOFA lacks jurisdiction to substantively review or alter its conveyance orders via Corrigendum, and such disputes over land area must be resolved by Civil Courts.
Surendran v. Sub-Inspector of Police
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for rash driving causing injury but modified the sentence from imprisonment to a fine considering the long delay since the offence.
Surendran v. Sub-Inspector of Police
The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction for rash driving causing injury but converted the imprisonment sentence into a fine due to the long delay since the offence.
Abhay V. Khinvasara v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court dismissed a 38-year delayed challenge to land acquisition under the MID Act, holding the acquisition valid and the petition barred by delay and laches.
Jurgaj Singh v. BSES Yamuna Power Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking mandamus to compel supply of documents for appeal against removal, holding that the respondent had duly performed its public duty and provided fair opportunity of hearing.
Shankar Pandu Bharsat v. Anand Subhashchandra Bora
The Bombay High Court upheld limitation under Section 32F(1A) of the BTAL Act, dismissing the petitioners' belated application to purchase agricultural land filed after the statutory two-year period.
Govinda Goga Donde v. Mayur Ramesh Bora
The Bombay High Court Full Bench held that under Section 9-A CPC, a Trial Court cannot frame a preliminary issue disposing of part of a suit or cause of action; jurisdictional objections must dispose of the entire suit or cause of action.
Ashok Babulal Avasthi v. Munna Nizamuddin Khan & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that in tenant suits against municipal demolition, the landlord is a proper party whose joinder the court may permit under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, affirming judicial discretion to add landlords for complete adjudication.
Dagadu Dnyanu Diwase and Ors. v. Prakash Dattatraya Diwase and Ors.
The High Court upheld the appellate decree holding the suit property as self-acquired by Plaintiff's father, dismissing Defendants' claim of joint family ownership and affirming Plaintiff's right to recover possession.
Chandru Mirchandani v. The Settlement Commissioner For Compensation
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking allotment of evacuee land after over five decades, holding the claim barred by delay and laches and emphasizing the necessity of a live legal right and proper parties.
National Institute of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj v. K. N. Sati and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's decision invalidating the downward refixation of pay and recovery of alleged excess payments without prior notice, holding such recovery barred after five years and emphasizing strict compliance with natural justice.