Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 499 to 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 567Nominal IndexLatabai Jadhav vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 499State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Kuchkoravi, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 500Kisan Moulding Limited v. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) Konkan Thane & Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 501Safset Agencies Private Ltd.vs. Riddhi Rahul Kumar Gosalia & Ors.,...
Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 499 to 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 567
Nominal Index
Latabai Jadhav vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 499
State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Kuchkoravi, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 500
Kisan Moulding Limited v. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) Konkan Thane & Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 501
Safset Agencies Private Ltd.vs. Riddhi Rahul Kumar Gosalia & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 502
Subhash Athare vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 503
Laura D'Souza vs. Lalit Timothy D'Souza, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 504
XYZ vs.The State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 505
Ruju R. Thakker vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 506
S vs R, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 507
Natvar Patel vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 508
Indian Institute of Technology by its Registrar vs Dadarao Tanaji Ingle and Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 509
Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 510
Dashrath Dhramaji Debur vs Special Police Inspector General Prison (East Region), Nagpur, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 511
Julia Rodrigues vs. Chandra Gulab Advani & ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 512
Suswarajya Foundation, Satara And Anr vs. The Collector, Satara And Anr, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 513
X vs Maharashtra National Law University, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 514
State of Maharashtra vs Deepak Jath, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 515
Rakesh Shukla vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 516
The Executive Engineer V/S Suchita Vijay Survey, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 517
Ashok Kumar Goel & Anr. vs. EbixCash Limited & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 518
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation V/SMr. Raghu Deu Mongal, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 519
Ganpat Bhagoji Kshirsagar & ors. vs. Anjana Krushna Jamdade & anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 520
Bajaj Electricals Limited vs. Electronics Mart India Limited & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 521
Simpy Bhardwaj vs Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 522
Kher Nagar Sukhsadan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 523
Tikona Infinet Private Limited versus Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 524
XYZ vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 525
A. H. Wadia Trust & Ors. vs. The Charity Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 526
Shaikh Tareq Mohammad Abdul Latif vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 527
Ajay Industrial Corporation vs. Deputy Commissioner of Customs, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 528
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Janus Aviation Pvt. Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 529
Tata Capital Limited Versus Priyanka Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. And Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 530
X vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 531
Thakan @ Nitin Bhausaheb Alhat vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 532
Rohit Sood v. Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 533
Anil Desai vs Mahendra Bhingardive, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 534
Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa vs Central Information Commission, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 535
M/s Soremartec S. A., Luxembourg vs. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 536
Dhule Municipal Commissioner vs. M/s Borse Borthers Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 537
Shahrukh Ziya Mohammad vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. (Criminal Writ Petition No. 783/2024), 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 538
Mr. Shashikant Gangar vs. Aditya Birla Finance Limited, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 539
Chandrakant Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 540
Sharad Mali vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 541
Om Impex versus The State of Maharashtra & ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 542
Maniyar Hasina vs Election Commission of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 543
Indus Power Tech Inc. v. M/s. Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 544
Sachin Waze v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 545
National Leasing Limited versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 546
Chhota Rajan vs. State, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 547
Nagpur Improvement Trust vs. Jain Kalar Samaj, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 548
The Commissioner of Income Tax versus Dr. Kasliwal Medical Care & Research Foundation, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 549
M/s. Duro Shox Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 550
Arunkumar Devnath Singh vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 551
Manjeet Kaur vs Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 552
Girnar Food & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs.TNI Plastics, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 553
Digambar Agawane vs State, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 554
Avenues Seasons Properties Llp Vs. Nissa Hoosain Nensey & Ors. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 555
M/s. J.W. Marriott Juhu vs. Nilesh Kanojia & Anr. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 556
Aiyaz Mohammad vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 557
The State of Maharashtra, through Directorate of Medical Education and Research & anr Versus Smt. Sunita Shankarrao Vhatkar & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 558
M/s BK Polimex India Private Limited vs Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 559
Deepak Deshmukh vs Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 560
Maruti Krishana Naik & Ors. vs. M/s. Advani Oerlikon Ltd. & Anr.,2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 561
Andreas Stihl Private Limited versus The Joint Commissioner of State Tax & ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 562
Rohan Borse vs. State, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 563
Nainesh Panchal vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 564
Balaji Puyad vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 565
Shishuvihar Shaishanik Sanstha & anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & ors. , 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 566
Air India Charters Ltd vs. Tanja Glusica & ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 567
Judgments/Final Orders:
Accused Not Entitled To Default Bail Just Because Court Failed To Conclude Trial Within 60 Days: Bombay High Court
Case Ttile: Latabai Jadhav vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 499
The Bombay High Court recently held that a person is not entitled to default bail just on the ground that the trial in the case is not completed within 60 days as prescribed under section 437 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Sitting at Aurangabad bench, single-judge Justice Sanjay Mehare refused to grant bail to a woman booked in a fraud and criminal conspiracy case.
'Quite Close To Cannibalism' Bombay High Court Upholds Death Sentence Of Man For Killing His Mother, Eating Her Organs
Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Sunil Kuchkoravi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 500
The Bombay High Court upheld the death sentence awarded to a man, who brutally killed his own mother and later ate her organs.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan stated that, after detailing the manner in which the convict killed his mother, eviscerated her organs and was about to 'cook' some of them by applying salt and chilly powder, said that his conduct indicated "pathological cannibalism." "The act of the convict was quite close to cannibalism," the judges said.
Further, the judges expressed shock over the defence of the convict that since he was habitual to consume flesh of cats and pigs, therefore, perhaps he might have committed the said offence.
Section 14 Of Limitation Act Applicable To Proceedings Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court Reiterates
Case Title: Kisan Moulding Limited v. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) Konkan Thane & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 501
The Bombay High Court has held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, which excludes time consumed in a proceeding initiated before a Court not having the jurisdiction, applies to proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
The bench of Justice R.I. Chagla excluded 272 days spent in prosecuting a recall application of the arbitral award before the MSME Council. The court observed that a party prosecuting its case in good faith and due diligence, and the prior proceedings were riddled with defect of jurisdiction would get the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act and the time consumed in such proceedings would stand excluded from the purview of limitation.
Appellate Court Can Direct Licensee To Pay Compensation Higher Than Contractual Rent During Pendency Of Appeal: Bombay High Court
Case title: Safset Agencies Private Ltd.vs. Riddhi Rahul Kumar Gosalia & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 502
The Bombay High Court has observed in the case of license agreements, it is permissible for an Appellate Court to direct the licensee to pay interim compensation to the licensor that is higher than the contractual damages/compensation agreed by the parties, during the pendency of an appeal.
A single judge bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne further observed that the Appellate Court is empowered to direct the licensee to deposit such compensation or fair market rent determined by it as a precondition for grant of stay of eviction under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC.
Case Title: Subhash Athare vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 503
The Bombay High Court last month held that the act of recording audio in a police station would not become an offence under the stringent Official Secrets Act (OSA).
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar, sitting in Aurangabad, quashed an FIR lodged against two brothers, one of whom works as a Constable with the Mumbai Police, who were booked under the Official Secrets Act for recording conversation with a police officer, within the police station at Pathardi, Ahmednagar.
[Indian Succession Act] Executor's Imprisonment Affects Management And Administration Of Deceased's Large Estates: Bombay High Court
Case title: Laura D'Souza vs. Lalit Timothy D'Souza
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 504
The Bombay High Court has observed that the incarceration of an executor of a will, who has to administer and manage 'large' estates and business ventures, would operate as a 'legal disability' for the executor to manage such estates.
A single judge bench of Justice N. J. Jamadar observed “If the estate is such that it does not require active management as is in the case of a passive investment, the incarceration of the executor may not have a bearing. However, whether the estate is large and comprises running business ventures, which require day to day management, it would be difficult to accede to the submission that the incarceration does not operate as a legal disability.”
Bombay High Court Slams State For Opposing Unmarried Woman's Pregnancy Termination As She Did Not "Fit Criteria" Of Being Widow Or Divorcee
Case title: XYZ vs.The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 505
The Bombay High Court on Monday pulled up the Maharashtra Government for opposing the 20-weeks medical termination of pregnancy of an 'unmarried' woman on the ground that she 'does not fit' the criteria for undergoing an abortion.
A division bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and Dr Neela Gokhale questioned the 'rationale' in the argument put forth by the State that for the petitioner, a 23-year-old unmarried woman, to benefit from the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, must fit in the criteria i.e. she either must be a widow or a divorcee.
Bombay High Court Revives PIL On Potholes And Poor Road Conditions
Case title: Ruju R. Thakker vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 506
The Bombay High Court has stated that it would revive a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the issue of potholes in Mumbai and other districts in Maharashtra.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar was pronouncing the judgment on a contempt petition filed by Advocate Ruju Thakkar alleging non-compliance of Court's order to maintain good road conditions by the BMC and other authorities. While the Court disposed of the contempt petition, it stated that given the larger public interest and fundamental rights involved in the case, it would revive the PIL.
Bombay High Court Slaps Rs 1 Lakh Cost On Husband Who Opposed Wife's Plea To Transfer Divorce Proceedings Despite Her Hardships
Case Title: S vs R
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 507
The Bombay High Court recently came to the aide of a woman, who was being 'compelled' by her estranged husband to travel at least 8 hours along with her pre-term born now 15-months old son, to attend divorce proceedings and also slapped a fine of Rs 1 lakh on the husband in order to ameliorate her hardships.
Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav noting the 'hardships' of the woman, transferred the divorce proceedings initiated by the husband at Vasai in Thane district to Bandra Family Court in Mumbai.
'Substantiative Powers' Of Municipal Corporations Can't Be Used To Benefit Developers: Bombay HC Paves Way For Demolishing Portions Of Thane Mall
Case Title: Natvar Patel vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 508
The Municipal Corporations and their Commissioners do have substantial powers under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act, 1949, however, these powers can never be exercised to benefit the builders or developers at the cost of public amenities, observed the Bombay High Court on Monday (October 7) while imposing a cost of Rs 2 lakh on a developer and the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) for permitting developer to construct a mall over a Nallah (drain).
A division bench of Justices Mahesh Sonak and Kamal Khata also set aside the February 2005 order of the TMC which regularised the illegally constructed portions of the popular Korum mall in Thane district, which would mean that the authorities will have to now demolish the mall.
Bombay HC Dismisses IIT Bombay's Appeal Against Payment Of Gratuity To Contract Workers
Case Title: Indian Institute of Technology by its Registrar vs Dadarao Tanaji Ingle and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 509
On 4th October, a Single Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice Sandeep V. Marne heard a petition filed by Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay (“IIT Bombay”) challenging the order passed by Assistant Labour Commissioner (“Central”) acting as Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, (“PG Act”), later then upheld by the Appellate Authority. The orders had allowed applications filed by Respondent i.e., the employees of the petitioner and directed payment of gratuity to them.
Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan Is A Religious And Charitable Trust; Its Anonymous Donations Cannot Be Taxed: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 510
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (October 8) held that the Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi is certainly a religious and a charitable trust and thus the 'anonymous' donations to the tune of Rs 159.12 crores, it received in the hundi (cash collection box) during the assessment years 2015 to 2019, can be exempted from income tax.
A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Somasekhar Sundaresan upheld the October 25, 2023 order of an Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had held that the Trust is both a charitable and religious one and thus was eligible to exemption from income tax on its anonymous donations.
Bombay High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Furlough To Prisoner For Not Doing Carpentry Work In Prison
Case Title: Dashrath Dhramaji Debur vs Special Police Inspector General Prison (East Region), Nagpur
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 511
The Bombay High Court recently quashed and set aside an order passed by the Special Police Inspector General of Prisons (East Region) which refused to permit furlough leaves to a convict on the ground that the prisoner refused to do 'carpentry' work while in jail.
A division bench of Justices Vinay Joshi and Vrushali Joshi, sitting at Nagpur, quashed the order passed by the Special Police Inspector General of Prisons, by which the officer refused furlough leave to the petitioner Dashrath Debur, a murder convict.
Purchase Of Goodwill And Continuing Same Business Must For Exemption Under Govt Notification Issued U/S 15(1) Of Bombay Rent Act: High Court
Case title: Julia Rodrigues vs. Chandra Gulab Advani & ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 512
The Bombay High Court has observed that a Notification issued by the State Government on 24 September 1948, exercising its powers under the proviso to Section 15(1) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, permits a 'transfer of business' and not a 'transfer of tenancy' for certain commercial premises. Thus, the continuation of business must involve a purchase of goodwill so that the transfer is not considered as unlawful subletting under the Act.
A single judge bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne was considering the petitioner-landlady's challenge to the District Court's order, which set aside the eviction decree passed by a Small Causes Court.
Bombay HC Directs Municipal Corporations & Local Bodies To Conduct 'Special Drive' To Remove Illegal Hoardings Of Political Parties, Revives PIL
Case title: Suswarajya Foundation, Satara And Anr vs. The Collector, Satara And Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 513
The Bombay High Court has revived a PIL pertaining to illegal hoardings and banners put up by political parties in public places. It has directed municipal corporations, municipal councils and other local bodies to conduct a 'special drive' to remove illegal hoardings and banners on public streets, public parks and other places.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar was hearing contempt petitions against non-compliance with Court's order in a PIL, where it has directed municipal corporations and other local bodies to remove illegal hoardings of political parties.
Expulsion Forever Will Lead To 'Academic Death': Bombay High Court Grants Relief To Law Student Accused In Multiple Sexual Harassment Cases
Case Title: X vs Maharashtra National Law University
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 514
While disposing of a plea filed by a final year law student of the Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU) challenging the decision of the varsity to expel him from the institution after he was found guilty of 'repeated' sexual harassment of girls by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), the Bombay High Court on Thursday said that the student's expulsion for an 'unspecified' period would result in his 'academic death.'
A division bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil opined that remanding the dispute back to the Vice Chancellor of the MNLU, would lead to a third round of litigation (the instant one being the second round), and thus, the petitioner student and also the complainant girl, both should not be subjected to any further distractions from their academic activities.
Bombay High Court Commutes Death Sentence Of Man Who Burnt Alive Woman, 2-Yr-Old; Awards Life Sentence
Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Deepak Jath
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 515
The Bombay High Court on Thursday commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment of a 46-year-old man, who set ablaze two women and a two-year-old girl.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Shyam Chandak said the instant case, wherein the convict - Deepak Jath, set ablaze two women and a two-year-old girl, which led to the death of one of the women and the minor girl, does not fall in the category of 'rarest of rare' case, warranting death sentence to the accused.
Man Grooving His Neck Towards A Woman While Hearing Music & Riding Bike Is Not 'Stalking' : Bombay High Court
Case Title: Rakesh Shukla vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 516
A man grooving his neck, towards a woman, while hearing music and riding a bike, will not amount to the offence of stalking as provided under section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Bombay High Court held on Friday. The court however, held that the act of riding a two-wheeler at a high speed and in a wavering manner, coming close to another two-wheeler and overtaking it, would amount to rash and negligent driving.
Single-Judge Justice Milind Jadhav therefore, quashed the conviction of one Rakesh Shukla, to the extent of the court convicting him for the offence of stalking but upheld his conviction for negligent and rash driving.
Bombay High Court Overturns Labour Court's Reinstatement Of Typist; Clarifies Regularization Criteria To Contractual Workers In State Instrumentalities
Case title: The Executive Engineer V/S Suchita Vijay Survey
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 517
A Single Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice Sandeep V. Marne ruled in favour of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) and overturned a Labour Court award that had directed the MSEB to reinstate Suchita Vijay Surve as a permanent employee with 50% back wages. Surve had worked as a typist on a contractual basis for the Board and had sought permanency after six years of service. The Court ruled that there was no employment relationship, as Surve was never formally appointed, but only engaged on a work-for-hire basis.
Bombay High Court Reaffirms Binding Nature Of Emergency Arbitrator's Decision, Grants Interim Relief U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act
Case Title: Ashok Kumar Goel & Anr. vs. EbixCash Limited & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 518
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Arif S. Doctor has observed that the object and intent of section 9 of the Arbitration Act is to support Arbitration and not defeat and/or permit parties to detract from the very process of arbitration. Therefore, party autonomy being the bedrock of arbitration, this would necessarily apply from the agreement to the rendering of the final arbitral award. The court reiterated that once a party agrees to institutional rules and participates in an emergency arbitration proceeding, it cannot later claim that the Emergency Arbitrator's ruling is non-binding or invalid.
Bombay High Court Upholds MSRTC's Right To Dismiss Conductor For Repeated Misconduct; Domestic Inquiries Do Not Require The Same Standard Of Proof As Judicial Proceedings
Case title: Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation V/SMr. Raghu Deu Mongal
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 519
A Single Bench of Bombay High Court comprising Justice Sandeep V. Marne ruled in favour of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC). It set aside the Industrial Court's order and reinstated MSRTC's right to dismiss a conductor, Raghu Deu Mongal, for serious misconduct. The court held that the domestic inquiry was fairly conducted and the punishment was appropriate.
Case title: Ganpat Bhagoji Kshirsagar & ors. vs. Anjana Krushna Jamdade & anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 520
While setting aside an order allowing amendment of plaint after the commencement of trial, the Bombay High Court has observed an illiterate lady obtaining certified copies of sale deeds cannot be said to have exercised 'due diligence', when she was aware of the sale deeds before filing the suit.
A single judge bench of Justice S. M. Modak was considering the petitioners' (defendants) challenge to the Trial Court's order, which allowed respondent no. 1's (plaintiff) application for amendment of the plaint after the trial had commenced.
Section 134(2) Of Trademarks Act Does Not Bar Applicability Of Clause XIV Of Letters Patent: Bombay High Court
Case title: Bajaj Electricals Limited vs. Electronics Mart India Limited & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 521
The Bombay High Court has observed that Section 134(2) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 does not bar a plaintiff from seeking leave of the Court to combine the cause of action of 'passing off' with the suit of infringement under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent.
A single judge bench of Justice R.I. Chagla observed that if the legislature had intended that Clause XIV should not be resorted during the enactment of the Trademarks Act, it would have made a provision to that effect in Section 134.
Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Accused In ₹6606 Crore Bitcoin Fraud Case, Cites Her Being A Woman, Mother Of Six-Yr-Old
Case Title: Simpy Bhardwaj vs Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 522
Observing that she is the mother of a six year old, the Bombay High Court last week granted bail to Simpy Bhardwaj, booked under the stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in 2023 for her alleged role in India's largest Bitcoin-based Ponzi scheme worth Rs 6,606 crore, related to a Delhi-based firm - Variable Tech Pvt Ltd.
Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale observed that since the applicant Bharadwaj is a woman, she is entitled to the benefit of the proviso to section 45(1) of the Act.
Bombay High Court Holds Redevelopment Rights of Society Not Part Of Moratorium Process; Issues Writ Of Mandamus For Redevelopment, Upholding Right to Shelter
Case Title: Kher Nagar Sukhsadan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 523
The Bombay High Court division bench of Justices Kamal Khata and M.S. Sonak has held that if the developer fails to meet its obligations under the Development Agreement, such as paying transit rent and completing construction within the specified time frame, there is a complete failure of consideration, and no rights accrue to it. The court awarded a writ of mandamus for permissions and approvals for redevelopment. It observed that the uncertain outcome of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) shouldn't deprive individuals of their basic right to shelter.
Taxpayer Can't Be Denied ITC For Merely Filing GST Form Manually If Functionality Issues Are Attributable To Dept: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Tikona Infinet Private Limited versus Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 524
Recently, an issue cropped up before the Bombay High Court, where it was emphasized that technicalities created by the Department and not the taxpayer, should not be put forth by the department to defeat the statutory rights and entitlement of the taxpayers.
The Division Bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain ruled that concerned Revenue officials (Respondent) cannot deny the benefits of accrued ITC (input tax credit) to the assessee (Petitioner) only because the prescribed forms were not filed electronically but were filed manually.
Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Man Booked For Insulting Woman's Modesty By 'Moving His Hands Over Nude Lady-Shaped Paperweight'
Case Title: XYZ vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 525
The Bombay High Court recently quashed a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against a Superintendent Engineer of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL), who was booked for insulting the modesty of a female employee by moving his hands over a paperweight, which the complainant said depicted the shape of a 'nude lady.'
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar quashed the FIR after refusing to accept the contention of the complainant, an executive engineer in the MSEDCL, who was a junior to the applicant.
Development Activities Needed To Generate Funds: Bombay High Court Says Wadia Trust Empowered To Develop Lands To Fund Charitable Activities
Case title: A. H. Wadia Trust & Ors. vs. The Charity Commissioner
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 526
In relation to an opinion sought by a Public Trust, the Bombay High Court has observed that the Trust is empowered to undertake development activities on its land either singly or through a joint venture for executing the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, in order to generate revenue for its charitable activities.
A single judge bench of Justice Abhay Ahuja was considering the Originating Summons filed by the trustees (plaintiffs nos. 2 to 5) of the A. H. Wadia Trust (plaintiff no. 1).
S. 295 IPC | Throwing Earth Material, Stones On Grave While Digging Land Doesn't Damage It, No Religious Sentiments Are Hurt: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Shaikh Tareq Mohammad Abdul Latif vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 527
The Bombay High Court while quashing a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against a businessman under section 295 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) held that mere throwing of earth material (soil, rocks etc) and stones on a grave while carrying out a digging work nearby it, would not amount to damaging, destroying or defiling the grave to hurt the religious sentiments.
Sitting at Aurangabad, a bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar noted that the petitioner Shaikh Tareq Mohammad Abdul Latif, had instructed some persons to level the land, he owned, which was abutting the grave. The judges noted that during the digging activity, some earth material was found to be thrown on the grave along with stones.
S.27A Customs Act | Interest On Delayed Refund Is Payable After Three Months Of Date Of Refund Application, Not From Date Of Order: Bombay HC
Case Title: Ajay Industrial Corporation vs. Deputy Commissioner of Customs
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 528
Pointing that the Department has delayed the refund on customs duty that was due & payable to assessee for almost ten years, the Bombay High Court ruled that such action of Department in avoiding the payment of interest on delayed refund by raising frivolous pleas, cannot be sustained.
The Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain observed that the respondent by misconceived construction of Section 27A of the Customs Act, cannot avoid payment of interest at the rate of 6% per annum, having retained and utilised the amount which was ultimately found to be refundable to the petitioner.
Case title: New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Janus Aviation Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 529
The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High has dismissed a Commercial appeal filed by insurance companies for recovery of an amount of 31.77 million US Dollars against a company providing airport handling services, on the ground that that there was no privity of contract between the parties.
A division bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Jusitce Abhay J. Mantri was considering the appellants' challenge to the order of Commercial Court, which returned the plaint filed by them, The Commercial Court found that the dispute was not a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (CC Act) and held that it was not a proper court to adjudicate the case.
Case Title: Tata Capital Limited Versus Priyanka Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 530
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla held that the scope of examination under section 11 (6A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act should be confined to the existence of an arbitration agreement on the basis of Section 7 of the Act. Similarly, the validity of an arbitration agreement, in view of Section 7 of the Act, should be restricted to the requirement of formal validity such as the requirement that the agreement be in writing.
Case Title: X vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 531
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (October 15) while granting bail to a man, booked for allegedly sexually assaulting his own minor daughter, observed that there is every possibility of the daughter implicating her father in a false case at the behest of her mother, since the parents have locked horns in a separate matrimonial dispute.
Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale noted the pending matrimonial dispute between the applicant and his wife, which the judge said assumed significance.
Case Title: Thakan @ Nitin Bhausaheb Alhat vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 532
Observing that it is most painful to stay in the overcrowded jails in India, the Bombay High Court recently while granting bail to a man 'wrongly' made an accused, ordered the complainant to pay Rs 4,20,000 to him for curtailing his freedom and for loss of his income.
Single-judge Justice Sanjay Mehare, sitting at Aurangabad bench, noted that the petitioner, a labourer, was in jail from February 7, 2024 as the complainant wrongly identified him as one of the assailants, who assaulted him and attempted to kill him. The judge noted, that the complainant 'lied' as he in the FIR raised serious allegations against the petitioner, but later on withdrew the same.
Case Title: Rohit Sood v. Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 533
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Jitendra S. Jain And M.S. Sonak, held that the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) to challenge the award passed under Section 18(4) of the MSMED Act would be governed by the agreement between the parties which has conferred exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court. In this case, a case was referred to the High Court to resolve the conflict between two judgments.
Case Title: Anil Desai vs Mahendra Bhingardive
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 534
The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a petition challenging the election of Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) faction's Anil Desai to the 18th Lok Sabha from Mumbai South-Central constituency, observing that the petition failed to establish the 'material impact' on the elections that concluded in June this year.
Single-Judge Justice Sharmila Deshmukh noted that the only ground on which the petitioner Mahendra Bhhingardive challenged Desai's election was that Desai, while annexing the mandatory affidavit to the nomination form, left several 'blank spaces' which, according to the petitioner, were mandatory to be filled.
'Reasons For Delay In Deciding A Case' Is Not 'Information' Under RTI Act: Bombay High Court
Case title: Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa vs Central Information Commission
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 535
The Bombay High Court on Thursday held that 'reasons for delay in taking a decision or deciding a case' cannot qualify 'information' as defined under the Right To Information (RTI) Act and thus, one cannot ask 'reasons' in an RTI application.
A division bench of Justices Mahesh Sonak and Jitendra Jain quashed an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) which had imposed costs of Rs 25,000 on the Secretary of the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG), for failing to provide information of 'reasons for delayed decision' in a complaint filed by a litigant against an advocate.
Case Title: M/s Soremartec S. A., Luxembourg vs. State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 536
While considering a case where the Commercial tax department has flagrantly breached the statutory provisions of Sec 23(4) of the MVAT Act, the Bombay High Court ruled that assessment order passed by Commissioner of Sales tax is vitiated by total non-application of mind.
Since a strong prima facie case is made out about manipulating the date of passing the assessment order, the Division Bench comprising Justice M.S Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jainfound that such manipulation was to create an impression that the order was made within the prescribed statutory period of limitation.
Case Title: Dhule Municipal Commissioner vs. M/s Borse Borthers Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 537
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Arun R. Pedneker has held that an arbitrator has the authority to change the venue to a conveniently located place even if the venue is specified in the agreement. The court held that the arbitrator may shift the venue if conducting proceedings at the agreed venue would be detrimental to the arbitration process. It observed that Section 20(3) does not completely bar the change of venue without the consent of the parties, even when the venue is agreed upon in the contract.
Case title: Shahrukh Ziya Mohammad vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. (Criminal Writ Petition No. 783/2024)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 538
While quashing a Sessions Court's order taking suo moto cognizance of a Magistrate's order, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has observed that the suo moto powers have to be used sparingly and when there is a prima facie reason to exercise such powers. It noted that uncalled use of suo moto powers causes unnecessary hindrance to the legal proceedings.
A division bench of Justice Vinay Joshi and Justice Vrushali V. Joshi remarked, “When the statute has invested powers to the Court, it also carries responsibility...Sou moto powers are to be exercised sparingly when the orders of inferior Court are against the law, procedure or there is a glaring mistake. The uncalled activism would put unnecessary hindrance in the smooth legal proceedings.”
Case title: Mr. Shashikant Gangar vs. Aditya Birla Finance Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 539
While hearing a plea concerning the trial court's dismissal of a suit claiming fraud and collusion by a bank and the shareholders of a company, the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court said that the rejection citing Section 34 SARFAESI Act amounted to miscarriage of justice, as the pleadings and reliefs were sought under the Specific Relief Act.
A single judge bench of Justice Bharat P. Deshpande in its order said, “The question of fraud and , collusion and the relief claimed in the suit of declaration that the loan facility and the mortgage created in favour of defendant no.1 (bank) is a nullity, is certainly not coming within the jurisdiction of DRT or under the SARFAESI Act. Such declaration is only permissible under the Specific Relief Act.”
Case Title: Chandrakant Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 540
The Bombay High Court on Friday (October 18) while dismissing the petition filed by an independent Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) highlighting the issue of duplicate voter cards, accepted the contention of the Election Commission of India (ECI) that it will be conducting 'free and fair' elections.
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar hoped that the ECI will develop some 'module' to ensure no 'bogus' voting takes place in the upcoming Maharashtra Assembly Elections.
Case Title: Sharad Mali vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 541
The Bombay High Court recently quashed a First Information Report (FIR) against a lawyer, who along with a few farmers, staged an agitation in front of the convoy of Abdul Sattar, the Minister of Agriculture, who had joined the Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde) group, by raising slogans like "Pannas Khoke, Ekdum Okay" (Fifty Crores All Okay).
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar noted that the petitioner Sharad Mali along with few farmers, halted Sattar's convoy on March 22, 2023 at Amalner. The judges noted that the protestors staged an agitation and threw cotton and empty cartons (boxes) in front of Sattar's convoy.
Case Title: Om Impex versus The State of Maharashtra & ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 542
The Bombay High Court ruled that since the revocation orders for registration cancellation on petitioner's application were passed contrary to principles of natural justice, all the subsequent proceedings initiated thereafter, which are consequential, shall be quashed.
“Before the revocation of cancellation of registration, the Petitioner was not supplied with the documents on the basis of which its application for cancellation of registration was rejected, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice”, observed the Division Bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain.
Case Title: Maniyar Hasina vs Election Commission of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 543
The Bombay High Court on Monday disposed of a petition filed by the parents of school students, who challenged the 'full time' poll duties for teachers amid exams, arguing that it 'violates the right to education' of their children.
Non-Compete Clause Is Invalid Post-Termination Of Contract As It Results In Restraint Of Trade: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Injunction
Case Title: Indus Power Tech Inc. v. M/s. Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 544
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice A.S. Chandurkar and Justice Rajesh S. Patil has held that though a non-compete clause can operate validly during the term of the agreement. But it would not be valid post-termination of the agreement as it would result in restraint of trade prohibited by Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Sachin Waze In Corruption Case Related To Anil Deshmukh
Case title: Sachin Waze v State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 545
The Bombay High Court granted bail to dismissed controversial cop Sachin Waze, who was arrested in the 'corruption' case related to former Home Minister and senior NCP (SP) leader Anil Deshmukh.
A division bench of Justices Mahesh Sonak and Jitendra Jain ordered Waze's release subject to the conditions that will be imposed on him by the special anti-corruption court in Mumbai.
Bombay HC Holds 'Income From Leasing Of Property' As 'Income From Business', Says Deciding Factor Is Not Ownership But Nature Of Activity
Case Title: National Leasing Limited versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 546
The Bombay High Court held that assessee had correctly accounted income from leasing out of properties under the head 'income from profits & gains of businesses', and not as 'income from house property'.
The Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla also after finding that income of assessee is derived from letting out of the properties, which in fact, is the principal business of the assessee as seen from its main objectives contained in its memorandum of association.
Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Chhota Rajan In Hotelier Murder Case, Suspends Life Sentence
Case Title: Chhota Rajan vs. State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 547
The Bombay High Court has granted bail to gangster Chhota Rajan, who was convicted for the murder of hotelier Jaya Shetty in 2001.
On May 30, 2024, a special MCOCA Court convicted Rajan along with others and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Nagpur Improvement Trust Asking To Vacate Land In 30 Days 'Waives' 2 Month Notice Allottee Has To Give Before Filing Lawsuit: Bombay HC
Case title: Nagpur Improvement Trust vs. Jain Kalar Samaj
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 548
In a case concerning the interpretation of Section 115 of Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) Act wherein a person can sue the authority only after two months from the expiry of his notice to the authority, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court said that NIT's conduct in asking a party to vacate a land in 30 days in turn amounted to a waiver of Section 115's mandate.
After referring to various pronouncements on the principle of waiver, a division bench of Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke and Justice M.W Chandwani said, “Therefore, issuing a Notice mentioning a lesser period than mentioned in Section 115 of the NIT Act and depriving the other party to approach the Civil Courts and depriving him from asserting his right under the common law by ignoring the provisions which is for the benefit of the Trust and the Trust has chosen not to act as per the provisions amounts to “waiver”.
Non-Disposal Of Application For Registration U/S 12AA Of IT Act Within 6 Months Doesn't Result In "Deemed Registration”: Bombay High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax versus Dr. Kasliwal Medical Care & Research Foundation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 549
Referring to decision of CIT vs. Harshit Foundation Sehmalpur, the Bombay High Court reiterated that Sec 12AA(2) does not make any provision, to the effect that non-deciding of the registration application u/s 12AA(2) within a period of six months, brought about a deemed registration.
The Division Bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla clarified that “non-disposal of application for registration by granting or refusing registration, before the expiry of six months as provided u/s 12AA(2), would not result in a deemed grant of registration”.
Tribunal's Award However Erroneous, Must Be Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Court Cannot Exercise Writ Jurisdiction: Bombay HC
Case Title: M/s. Duro Shox Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 550
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Arun R. Pedneker held that when the 'Award' is made by the Facilitation Council / Tribunal by exercising jurisdiction vested in it, however erroneous the 'Award' may be, the same has to be challenged only by invoking Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
This court would not exercise jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, only to avoid the aggrieved party from the hardship of deposit of 75% of the award amount in terms of Section 19 of the MSMED Act.
Bombay High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Father Of Another Minor Who Was Present In The Pune Porsche Car During Accident
Case Title: Arunkumar Devnath Singh vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 551
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by the father of the second minor in the Pune Porsche accident, who was sitting next to the main accused - a Child in Conflict with Law (CCL), who allegedly was driving the car on May 19, 2024 in a high speed and killed two youth after mowing them down.
Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale noted that the applicant Arunkumar Singh had bribed the doctors at the Sasoon Hospital in Pune just after the accident to get his son's blood samples changed with another co-accused, only to ensure that the medical reports do not indicate presence of any alcohol in his son's blood.
Woman Advocates Seeks Senior Designation After Completing 10 Years Of Practice, Cites Fundamental Duties; Bombay High Court Rejects Plea
Case Title: Manjeet Kaur vs Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 552
The Bombay High Court on Monday (October 21) dismissed the plea filed by a woman advocate, who sought to be designated as a 'senior advocate' in view of her completing 10 years in legal practice.
A division bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Vrushali Joshi noted that the petitioner advocate - Manjeet Kaur (47), sought senior designation while relying on section 16 (which provides for designation of senior advocates based on their knowledge and standing in the Bar) of the Advocates Act, 1961 and also the fundamental duties provided under Article 51A of the Constitution of India.
Bombay High Court Holds Tea Brand 'GIRNAR' As Well-Known Trademark In India, Says It Has Become A 'Household Name'
Case title: Girnar Food & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs.TNI Plastics
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 553
The Bombay High Court has held the popular food and beverage mark–'GIRNAR' as a well-known trademark in India within the meaning of the Trade Marks Act, noting that its recognition and goodwill extends beyond any specific class of goods or services.
In doing so a single judge bench of Justice R.I. Chagla also observed that the trade mark 'GIRNAR' has indeed become a household name in India.
“You Are Not A CM": High Court Denies Interim Bail To BJP Leader For Contesting Maharashtra Polls, Says Arvind Kejriwal Order Not Applicable
Case title: Digambar Agawane vs State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 554
The Bombay High Court on Thursday while denying interim bail to a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Digambar Agawane for contesting the upcoming Maharashtra Assembly Elections, said 'right to contest' was not a fundamental right and that the applicant can contest the ensuing polls from the jail itself.
Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale, while refusing to accept the contention of Agawane that the recent ruling of the Supreme Court in Arvind Kejriwal's case would squarely apply on his case, as he too seeks interim bail to contest the upcoming elections just like Kejriwal had sought interim bail for campaigning in the then held Lok Sabha Elections.
Arbitration Proceedings Can't Be Commenced Against Third Parties Who Are Not Parties To Agreement: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Avenues Seasons Properties Llp Vs. Nissa Hoosain Nensey & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 555
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice A. S. Chandurkar and Justice Rajesh S. Patil has held that arbitration proceedings cannot be commenced against third parties who have not signed the Arbitration Agreement. The court observed that either the developer or the society, who has signed the Development Agreement can invoke the arbitration agreement in case of dispute. A party who is not mentioned in the Development Agreement and has not signed the contract cannot be referred to arbitration.
Dismissal For Theft Justified When Position Of Trust Is Violated, Reinstatement Not Automatic Remedy And Value Of Stolen Property Irrelevant: Bombay HC
Case title: M/s. J.W. Marriott Juhu vs. Nilesh Kanojia & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 556
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne set aside the Labour Court's and Industrial Court's orders reinstating a security associate dismissed from JW Marriott for theft. The Court held that theft of hotel property by a security employee constitutes serious misconduct regardless of the value of stolen items, given their position of trust. The Court found that the employee's subsequent disruptive behavior with union members further justified the dismissal. While quashing the reinstatement order, the Court awarded compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs in lieu of reinstatement, considering the totality of circumstances.
Bombay HC Sets Guidelines For Reviewing Proportionality Of Industrial Disciplinary Action; Bars Use Of New Evidence From Assessing Proportionality Of Punishment
Case title: Aiyaz Mohammad vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 557
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Anil L. Pansare remanded the case of a dismissed worker back to the Labour Court, directing a fresh assessment of punishment proportionality based solely on existing evidence. The court ruled that while Mahindra and Mahindra could potentially justify harsher punishment for the alleged protest leader, the stark disparity between his dismissal and co-workers' four-day suspension warranted review. Following Supreme Court precedents in Raghubir Singh and Firestone Tyre cases, the court held that proportionality assessment must exclude new evidence and rely only on the original trial record.
Permanency Of Post Not To Be Granted Merely On The Completion Of Certain Days Of Service; But To Be Considered If Scheme Present For The Same:Bombay High Court
Case Title: The State of Maharashtra, through Directorate of Medical Education and Research & anr Versus Smt. Sunita Shankarrao Vhatkar & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 558
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne considered a petition against an order passed by the Industrial Court allowing Respondents grant of permanency as well as other benefits. The Court ordered that simply completion of 240 days of service is not enough to mandate permanent post, however, in case creation of permanency was in consideration, via scheme provision or otherwise, then the case of employees must be considered fairly.
Case Title: M/s BK Polimex India Private Limited vs Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 559
The Bombay High Court recently while ordering the release of the paintings of renowned artists Francis Newton Souza and Akbar Padamsee, held that every nude painting or painting depicting some sexual intercourses poses cannot be styled as obscene.
A division bench of Justices Mahesh Sonak and Jitendra Jain noted that the decision of the Assistant Customs Commissioner (ACC) in Mumbai, was 'obsessed with his notions of obscenity' and thus he confiscated and directed the destruction of the artworks by Souza and Padamsee.
ED Misused Its Powers To Arrest, Acted As Per Its Whims & Fancies: Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Accused In PMLA Case
Case Title: Deepak Deshmukh vs Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 560
The Bombay High Court last week while granting bail to a man arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) observed that the anti-money laundering agency "misused" its powers of arrest and acted as per this own "whims and fancies."
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan slammed the ED for arresting the petitioner Deepak Deshmukh in a predicate offence lodged way back eighty years ago (in 2016) in which he was neither named nor chargesheeted.
Violent Strike Justifies Immediate Termination Without Enquiry: Bombay HC
Case title: Maruti Krishana Naik & Ors. vs. M/s. Advani Oerlikon Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 561
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne upheld Advani Oerlikon Ltd.'s decision to terminate workers who participated in illegal strikes and violent protests without conducting a prior enquiry. The Court ruled that where employee misconduct clearly jeopardizes workplace safety, as evidenced by acts of obstruction, intimidation, and assault, employers can justify termination retrospectively in court proceedings.
Outstanding Demand Under Maharashtra Settlement Can't Be Adjusted Against Refund Payable Under Maharashtra VAT Act: High Court
Case Title: Andreas Stihl Private Limited versus The Joint Commissioner of State Tax & ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 562
The Bombay High Court held that authorities under MVAT Act while exercising powers under Maharashtra Settlement of Arrears of Taxes, Interest, Penalties or Late Fees Act, 2022, cannot invoke provisions of Section 50 of MVAT and that too in review proceedings under Settlement Act.
The Division Bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain observed that there is no provision under Settlement Act which provides for calculation of outstanding arrears of a particular year to be arrived at after adjustment of refund for another year more so in a case where there is no such adjustment of refund order on date of application or on date of settlement order u/s 13 of Settlement Act.
Bombay High Court Allows Medical Officer To Contest Upcoming Elections; Orders State To Accept Resignation
Case title: Rohan Borse vs. State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 563
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday ordered the Maharashtra Government to accept the resignation of a Medical Officer, who seeks to contest in the upcoming State Legislative Assembly elections.
A vacation court presided over by Justices Sandeep Marne and Manjusha Deshpande ordered the State to accept the resignation of Dr Rohan Borse, a Grade 'A' Medical Officer deployed at the District Civil Hospital at Nasik.
Bombay High Court Orders Enquiry Against Police Officers For Using AC, Water-Cooler, TV, Computer At Police Station Without Paying Supplier
Case Title: Nainesh Panchal vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 564
The Bombay High Court was recently disturbed to note that a police station in Thane city used air-conditioners, water coolers, computers, LED TV, printers and other valuable electronic devices, for free and later on when the supplier demanded money, the station officers returned the equipments without paying a penny.
A division bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and Dr Neela Gokhale ordered the Director General of Police, Maharashtra to look into the allegations and file a report before it.
Prisoners Cannot Be Asked To Wait For Over One Year To Avail Parole In Emergency Situations Involving Their Family: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Balaji Puyad vs State of Maharashtra
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 565
Issues like family members' serious illness, wife's delivery, natural calamities etc are unforeseen and thus a prisoner cannot be asked to wait for one and a half years, till he becomes eligible to avail the facilities of furlough or parole leaves, the Bombay High Court held recently.
A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande directed the Superintended of Central Jail, Nashik to reconsider its decision on the application filed by the petitioner Balaji Puyad, who has sought parole leaves in wake of his wife's illness but was denied.
Three-Year Limitation on Salary Arrears Claims Upheld: Bombay HC Restricts Teacher's Back Pay Despite Continuous Employment
Case title: Shishuvihar Shaishanik Sanstha & anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 566
A Division Bench comprising Justice Mangesh S. Patil and Justice Shailesh P. Brahme partially allowed a writ petition challenging an Education Officer's order regarding salary arrears, ruling that despite continuous employment, claims for salary arrears must be restricted to three years preceding the filing of the petition.
Principal Employer Can't Escape Liability Under EC Act By Claiming Workers Were Through Contractor: Bombay HC
Case title: Air India Charters Ltd vs. Tanja Glusica & ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 567
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh dismissed Air India Charters Ltd.'s appeal against compensation awarded to a deceased pilot's dependents. The Court held that under Section 12 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, the principal employer bears primary liability for compensation even when workers are engaged through contractors.
Other orders/Observations:
Will Issue Guidelines To Ensure No Individual Is Interrogated Overnight: Central Govt Tells Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court was recently informed that the Central government is taking steps to ensure that no individual is detained overnight only for the purpose of interrogation.
A division bench of Justices Revait Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan took the statement on record and ordered the Central government to place its guidelines, if any, before it on the next date of hearing.
Badlapur Sexual Assault: Bombay High Court Rejects Pre-Arrest Plea Of School Chairman And Secretary; Raps Police For Not Arresting Them
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday rejected the anticipatory bail applications filed by the chairman and secretary of the school in Badlapur where the two minor girls, studying in kindergarten were sexually assaulted by a sweeper in the toilet.
Single-judge Justice Rajesh Laddha noted that the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was enacted to safeguard children from sexual crimes and thus opined that the interests of the children need to be prioritised over the interests of the perpetrators.
Study Finds Micro Polythene In Fishes: Bombay High Court Takes Suo-Moto Cognizance Of Garbage Pollution On Mumbai Seashores
The Bombay High Court has taken suo-moto cognizance of the garbage pollution on the seashore in Mumbai, on account of microplastics.
A Division Bench of Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice M.M Sathay took note of a report from a leading daily newspaper, which disclosed the presence of micro polythene in marine fishes. The report was based on a study conducted by the Central Institute of Fisheries Research.
Issues Have Been Worked Out For Release Of Movie: Makers Of 'Emergency' Film Tell Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court was on Friday informed that the makers of the controversial film Emergency have "worked out" the issue with regards to the cuts and edits to be made so that it can be released for public viewing.
A division bench of Justices Burgess Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla was informed that after communications between the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), Zee Studios and Manikarnika Films Productions (owned by Kangana Ranaut), the issue has been worked out.
In 31 Months, Three Out Of Four Bombay HC Benches Recuse From Hearing Plea To Clear Father Stan Swamy's Name From Bhima-Koregaon Case
Last month, Bombay High Court judge Justice Revati Mohite-Dere recused from hearing a plea filed in December 2021 by the next of kin of Father Stan Swamy, who sought clearing the now deceased (Swamy's) name from the Bhima-Koregaon case.
The plea filed by Father Fraser Mascarenhas, the former principal of Xavier's College in Mumbai, recently came up for hearing before a bench of Justices Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan.
Bombay HC Issue Notice On Plea Challenging MoU Between State And GOI-Owned Sanitary Napkins Manufacturer For Setting Up Dialysis Centres
The Bombay High Court has issued notice on a petition challenging the MOU between the Maharashtra government and HLL Life Care Ltd., a Government of India-owned corporation, which manufactures sanitary napkins and condoms, for providing Haemodialysis services in Maharashtra.
A Division Bench of Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice M.M Sathaye were hearing a petition challenging a Notice issued by HLL Life Care, under which only the empanelled firms with HLL were eligible to participate in a tender for providing haemodialysis services.
Bollywood Actor Shilpa Shetty, Husband Raj Kundra Move Bombay High Court Against Notice For Eviction From Residence, Farm House
Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband Raj Kundra, both have moved the Bombay High Court challenging the eviction notices issued to the couple after their residential premises in Mumbai's plush Juhu area and Farm House near Pawna Lake, were provisionally attached by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection to an alleged crypto assets ponzi scheme case.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan on Wednesday (October 9) issued notice to the ED and has kept the matter for hearing on Thursday (October 10) afternoon.
Bombay High Court Asks State To File Affidavit On Steps Taken To Provide Facilities And Safety To Students Of Ashram Schools
The Bombay High Court has directed the State to file an affidavit concerning the steps taken by it to provide proper facilities and ensuring the safety of the students in various Ashram schools.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkarissued the directions in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the conditions in the ashram schools in Maharashtra. The PIL alleged that the lack of facilities and safety measures in these schools caused the death of many students.
Won't Act On Eviction Notices Against Shilpa Shetty & Raj Kundra Till Their Plea Against Provisional Attachment Is Decided: ED In Bombay HC
In a relief for Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty and her businessman husband Raj Kundra, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday told the Bombay High Court that it will not act upon the 'eviction notices' issued to the couple to vacate their residential house in Juhu and their Farm House in Pune.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan said it will dispose of the petition by recording the statement made by the ED counsel and stated in the order that the eviction notices should not be acted upon till the couple files application against the confirmation order passed by the adjudicating authority.
The Bombay High Court has asked the Union of India to file an affidavit on whether it considered the recommendations made by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) for the inclusion of plastic flowers in the list of banned single-use plastics.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar was hearing a petition filed by the Association of Natural Flower Growers, Pune, which sought a direction to ban the use of plastic flowers in Maharashtra.
Parents of a school in the city have moved the Bombay High Court challenging various circulars of the Election Commission of India (ECI) and also the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) deploying over 2000 employees of the Education Department, mostly teachers as Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and Polling Station Officers (PSOs) for the upcoming State Assembly Elections.
A division bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil noted the contention of the parents, that due to such circulars, demanding teachers to be working full time for all the working days of the week, affect the functioning of schools, particularly the ongoing examinations of various classes.
PIL In Bombay Court Against 'Ticket Scalping' And 'Black Marketing' Of Online Tickets Of Concerts And Major Events
In relation to the recent controversy concerning 'ticket scalping' of Coldplay concert, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking the formation of guidelines to address the practices of black marketing, ticket touting and ticket scalping of online tickets during concerts and other events.
Bombay High Court Asks Pollution Control Board, BMC To Respond To Allegations Of Rampant Use Of 'PoP Idols' During Festivals
The Bombay High Court on Monday (October 21) asked the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (BMC) to file affidavits to respond to allegations of rampant use of Plaster of Paris (PoP) idols during festivals this year.
The matter concerns a PIL that seeks implementation of the ban on using PoP to manufacture religious idols. Today, the counsel for the petitioner stated that there was extensive use of PoP idols during the Diwali and Dussehra festivities this year. The counsel stated that the PoP idols were being used despite a ban and against the Court's earlier order.
Bombay High Court Pulls Up Mumbai Police For “Lethargic And Lackadaisical" Probe In Allegations Of Illegal Bungalows In City's Madh-Island Region
The Bombay High Court last week pulled up the Mumbai Police for its 'lethargic and lackadaisical' approach in dealing with a First Information Report (FIR) related to the alleged forging of documents and also maps to construct illegal bungalows at the city's plush Madh-Island area in western suburbs.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan noted that the FIR with regards to the alleged forging of 884 maps for constructing illegal bungalows, was lodged way back in December 2021 with the Kherwadi Police Station in Bandra, yet the police has recorded statements of only 24 witnesses.
Bombay High Court Directs Mumbai University To File Affidavit On Minimum Attendance Requirement In PIL Over Law Students 'Absenteeism'
The Bombay High Court has directed the University of Mumbai to file an affidavit on whether the university has prescribed any minimum attendance for students to be eligible for writing the examinations.
The issue concerns a PIL filed by a law professor from Mumbai University seeking enforcement of mandatory attendance requirements among law students enrolled in various colleges affiliated with the university.
'Prima Facie' BMC Has Failed To Control The Menace Of Illegal Hawkers: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday, while castigating the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for 'failing' to control the menace of illegal hawkers within Mumbai, said it will now have a 'pragmatic' approach to resolve this long pending issue.
A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Kamal Khata was irked to note that despite the 'tall claims' of the BMC in its earlier affidavits of identifying 20 sites across the city and keeping a vigil, the issue of hawkers continued.
PIL in Bombay High Court Challenges Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019.
The petitioner is an association of lawyers practicing at the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) in Mumbai. The petitioner contends that the amended Act has brought several changes detrimental to the interests of victims of road accidents and their families.
Bombay High Court Issues Notice To Railway Authorities On Alleged Harassment Faced By Woman Advocate For Feeding Stray Dogs At Bandra Station
The Bombay High Court on Thursday issued notice to the Railway Protection Police (RPF) and also the Government Railway Police (GRP) on a petition filed by a woman advocate, who was allegedly harassed by the railway officers for feeding a handicap dog on the premises of Bandra railway station.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan has also ordered the authorities to preserve the CCTV footages of platform number 1 of the Bandra railway station, where the incident occurred on September 6.
Teachers Of Private Engineering College Move Bombay High Court Against Poll Duties
Around 90 teachers of a city-based private engineering college have moved the Bombay High Court against their requisition by the Election Commission of India (ECI) for performing poll duties during and before the upcoming Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Elections.
The petitioner teachers, have taken exception to various communications pertinently the one issued by the ECI on October 16, asking the Thadomal Shahani Engineering College in the western suburbs of Khar, to send their employees, especially teachers for poll duties.