Nominal Index [Citation 490 – 500]

1. Atul S/o Raju Dongre and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 490

2. Sudeep Suhas Kulkarni and Anr. v. Abbas Bahadur Dhanani 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 491

3. Damodhardas Govindprasad Sangi v. Fatehsinh s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 492

4. Shrichand @ Chandanmal Sugnamal Panjwani v. Ahamed Ismayil Valodia and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 493

5. Kiran Dattatraya Shedke v. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 494

6. Dr. Hany Babu Musaliyarveettil Tharayil v. National Investigation Agency & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 495

7. Harishchandra Sitaram Khanorkar v. State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 496

8. Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 497

9. Chowgule & Company (P) Ltd. v. JCIT 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 498

10. J. P. Parekh & Son & Anr. v. Naseem Qureshi & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 499

11. Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Board of Trustees, Mumbai Khadi and Village Industries Association 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 500

Reports/Judgments

1. Marrying Another Woman Without Wife's Consent Constitutes Cruelty U/S 498-A IPC: Bombay High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Atul S/o Raju Dongre and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 490

The Bombay High Court held that a husband marrying another woman during the existence of first marriage and without his wife's consent constitutes cruelty under section 498-A of the IPC.

If the performance of second marriage during subsistence of the first marriage is not interpreted as cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC, it would frustrate the legislative intent to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relative of her husband, the court held

2. Branding A Child As "Illegitimate" In Itself Amounts To Harassment: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Sudeep Suhas Kulkarni and Anr. v. Abbas Bahadur Dhanani

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 491

The Bombay High Court recently granted guardianship of a minor to her biological parents reiterating that welfare of the minor should be the paramount factor and it cannot be subordinated to the personal law of the minor.

Justice Manish Pitale observed that the parents' plea cannot be rejected merely because Muslim law indicates that a child born outside marriage has no right to inheritance or descent.

Commenting on the usage of the term 'illegitimate' for such children, the court said, "for no fault of the child, it is branded illegitimate for the world at large, which in itself amounts to harassment to the child."

3. [O VI R 17 CPC] Merely Because Proposed Amendments Relate To Same Property, Doesn't Imply That Party Can Change Nature Of Suit: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Damodhardas Govindprasad Sangi v. Fatehsinh s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 492

The Bombay High Court recently reiterated that an amendment that completely changes the nature of the suit cannot be permitted.

Justice Sandeep V. Marne of the Aurangabad bench set aside a trial court order which allowed amendment to prayers in a property dispute despite observing that the plaintiffs were bringing a new case through the amendment.

The trial court allowed the amendment stating that since the amendment is in respect of the same property, the plaintiffs can seek the prayer as to how they are entitled to the suit property.

The court said that this reason is erroneous and the trial court completely lost sight of the fact that the amendment would change the nature of the suit entirely.

4. Enforcement Of Lok Adalat Award Does Not Require Payment Of Stamp Duty/ Registration: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Shrichand @ Chandanmal Sugnamal Panjwani v. Ahamed Ismayil Valodia and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 493

The Bombay High Court recently held that a Lok Adalat award, being equivalent to a civil court decree, can be enforced via an execution suit and does not require registration and payment of stamp duty for enforcement.

Justice Sandeep V. Marne stated that Lok Adalat awards are fully executable. There is no question of a specific performance suit for the settlement which the Lok Adalat has decreed, the court held.

5. A Person Cannot Be Subjected To Rigors Of Externment By Relying On Same Cases, Violative Of Article 19: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Kiran Dattatraya Shedke v. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 494

The Bombay High Court has said that subjecting a person to externment by relying upon the same cases, which were also subject matter of the previous orders of externment, is violative of Article 19 of Constitution.

Quashing a third order of externment passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Nashik, Justice Prakash Naik observed that the externing authority relied on same cases that were used to extern the appellant previously. The powers of externment are exercised in most arbitrary manner, said the court.

6. Bombay High Court Permits Former DU Prof Hany Babu To Undergo Cataract Surgery At Private Hospital In Mumbai

Case Title: Dr. Hany Babu Musaliyarveettil Tharayil v. National Investigation Agency & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 495

The Bombay High Court allowed Delhi University (DU) associate professor Hany Babu, accused in the Bhima Koregaon - Elgar Parishad case to undergo cataract surgery at a private hospital in Mumbai.

A division bench led by Justice AS Gadkari directed Babu, currently lodged in Taloja Prison, to be escorted to the private hospital on Tuesday, further permitting hospitalisation for four days. During this time, he would also undergo diagnosis for upper abdominal pain and osteoarthritis. The court refused to widen the scope of the petition regarding treatment for other ailments as well. It only permitted a cataract surgery and diagnosis for other ailments.

7. 'Held Father Figure, Betrayed Trust': Bombay HC Upholds Life Sentence Of 55-Yr-Old For Raping His Domestic Helper's Minor Daughter

Case Title: Harishchandra Sitaram Khanorkar v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 496

The Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the life sentence of a 55-year-old man convicted for raping the minor daughter of his domestic help stating that the appellant, being a fatherly figure in the girl's life, betrayed her trust.

The accused was under moral obligation to protect the child but he destroyed her future life. He violated the victim's privacy and personal integrity and also caused serious psychological as well as physical harm to the victim, the court stated. The court further said that DNA testing can both exonerate the wrongly convicted and identify the guilty. Modern DNA testing can provide powerful new evidence. DNA technology as a part of forensic science and scientific discipline not only provides guidance to investigation but also supplies the Court accurate information about features of identification of criminals, the court remarked.

8. Applicant Old And Suffering From Multiple Illnesses; No Question Of Influencing The Investigation As He Is Not Home Minister Anymore: Bombay HC Grants Bail To Anil Deshmukh In Corruption Case

Case Title: Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 497

The Bombay High Court granted bail to former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh in a case regarding illegal gratification from bar owners and corruption in police transfers and posting in Maharashtra.

The court considered Deshmukh's old age and the fact that he is suffering from multiple ailments. The court noted that he has been in custody for more than a year. The charge-sheet has already been filed with respect to the issue of corruption. There is no question of applicant influencing the investigation as he is not the Home Minister any longer. There is no question of the trial concluding any time soon in the near future, the court added.

9. Failure To Disclose All Material Facts Is Essential To Issue Tax Reassessment Notice: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Chowgule & Company (P) Ltd. v. JCIT

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 498

The Bombay High Court at Goa held that failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts is an essential jurisdictional parameter that must be fulfilled before any notice can be issued for reopening the tax assessment proceedings after the expiration of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

The division bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Bharat P. Deshpande observed that in the absence of any allegation or a plain statement about compliance with the jurisdictional parameter, the reassessment notice cannot be ordinarily sustained.

10. Court Empowered To Grant Money Claim Under Section 9 Of A&C Act On Basis Of Admitted Claim: Bombay High Court

Case Title: J. P. Parekh & Son & Anr. v. Naseem Qureshi & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 499

The Bombay High Court reiterated that the power of the Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to grant interim measures of protection, is wider than the power under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). It ruled that procedural provisions enumerated in the CPC cannot be invoked to defeat the grant of interim relief, while deciding an application under Section 9 of the A&C Act.

The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre concluded that the Court is empowered to pass an order under Section 9 of A&C Act granting the applicant's money claim, on the basis of an admitted claim or acknowledged liability. It noted that the Court, while considering a relief under Section 9, is not strictly bound by the provisions of Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC.

11. Bombay High Court Restrains Mumbai Khadi and Village Industries Association From Selling Any Goods Under 'Khadi' Mark

Case Title: Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Board of Trustees, Mumbai Khadi and Village Industries Association

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 500

The Bombay High Court temporarily restrained the Mumbai Khadi and Village Industries Association from using the mark 'KHADI' and 'Charkha' logo or any deceptively similar mark to sell any product as part of its trade name, or in any manner that may amount to passing off.

The court said that prima facie, the plaintiff Khadi & Village Industries Commission made out a strong case for protection of its rights on the registered trademark and the defendant cannot avoid interim injunction by relying upon Section 34 of the Trademarks Act. The court noted that the plaintiff holds registration for its wordmark KHADI, label mark and device mark, for a plethora of classes and not limited to cloth or textile products.

Other Developments

1. Bombay HC Refuses To Pass Orders On PIL For Expediting Appointment Of High Court Judges

Case Title: Dr. Sharmila Ghuge v. Union of India

The Bombay High Court refused to give any direction in a PIL which seeks expedition of appointment process of judges at the high court observing that no orders are necessary as a similar petition is pending before the Supreme Court.

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Santosh Govindrao Chapalgaonkar posted the matter to February 14, 2023 for further consideration.

2. Thank God Film: Makers Settle Dispute After Bombay High Court Refuses To Stay Release

Case Title: Azure Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Maruti International & Ors.

After the Bombay High Court refused ad-interim reliefs to plaintiffs Azure Entertainment in a commercial suit worth Rs. 4.50 crores against release of the film "Thank God," the parties entered into consent terms and settled the matter for Rs. 3.75 crore.

Justice BP Colabawalla decreed the suit against defendant Nos. 1 to 3 (Maruti and its partners) to jointly and severally pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 4.50 crores together with interest @ 10% pa plus GST under Clause 11 of the Second Addendum dated 21st October, 2020.

However, the court recorded the settlement amount of Rs 3.75 crores and said that if there was even a single default in payment, then the entire decretal amount of Rs. 4.50 crores together with interest would become forthwith due and payable.

3. Bombay High Court Issues Notice On Gautam Navlakha's Bail Appeal In Bhima Koregaon case

Case Title: Gautam P. Navlakha v. NIA and Anr.

Journalist and activist Gautam Navlakha, who is an accused in the Bhima Koregaon Elgar Parishad case, approached the Bombay High Court in appeal against rejection of his bail application by the trial court.

The division bench of Justice AS Gadkari and Justice P. D. Naik issued notice to the NIA in the case.

4. Nawab Malik's Health Deteriorating Say Counsel, Bombay High Court Posts Bail For Hearing on January 6, 2023

Case title – Mohammad Nawab Mohammad Islam Malik @ Nawab Malik v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

The Bombay High Court refused an urgent hearing to NCP leader Nawab Malik on his application seeking bail on merits and medical grounds in a money laundering case even as his counsels pointed out that one of his kidneys has failed.

Justice MS Karnik noted that Malik was already getting treatment at a private hospital therefore there wasn't an urgency. The court directed the Enforcement Directorate to file its reply to the appeal within two weeks and posted the matter for arguments post vacation on January 6, 2023.

5. Are Stray Dogs Roaming In HC Premises Its Residents? Bombay HC Contempt Notice To Lawyer Seeking Designated Location Within HC To Feed Strays

Case Title: Vijay Shankarrao Talewar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Observing that a lawyer's letter seeking a designated place within the Bombay High Court premises in Nagpur to feed dogs was for "publicity" in a sub-judice matter, the High Court issued a contempt notice against Advocate Ankita Kamlesh Shah and the civic officer who acted on her request.

A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and M.W. Chandwani passed the order in 2006 ongoing PIL filed by activist Vijay Talewar in which it passed a slew of directions against feeding and caring for stray dogs.

The request letter prima facie amounts to interference in administration of justice, the court stated.

The court noted that the letter doesn't mention law "that a right exists in the Nagpur Municipal Corporation to identify High Court premises as a place for feeding dogs" nor was it stated whether strays roaming in High Court premises "have been determined by a competent authority to be the residents of the High Court premises."

6. May Not Be Possible To Use Garian Lands For Rehabilitation Of Those Affected By Koyna Dam Project: Bombay High Court

Case Title: High Court On Its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra

The Bombay High Court observed that Gairan land cannot be allotted for private purposes and it may not be possible to use them for rehabilitation of project-affected persons of Koyna Dam in Satara district.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Santosh Chapalgaonkar was responding to suggestions of the amicus curiae in a suo motu PIL.

7. Dharavi Redevelopment: Bombay High Court Allows Dubai Based Company To Challenge Tender Process By Which Adani Emerged Highest Bidder

Case Title: Seclink Technologies Corporation v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

The Bombay High Court allowed amendment in a petition challenging the tender process for Dharavi Redevelopment Project. The draft amendment claims that the state acted in a mala fide manner favouring the Adani Group and preventing petitioner Seclink Technologies from bidding.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Santosh Chapalgaonkar allowed the petitioner to amend the petition according to the draft amendment submitted in court. It posted the matter for further consideration on January 6, 2022.

8. Lawyer Who Wanted Designated Place In Bombay HC Premises To Feed Stray Dogs To Tender Unconditional Apology After Contempt Notice

Case Title: Vijay Shankarrao Talewar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Days after the Bombay High Court Nagpur bench issued contempt notice to lawyer seeking designated location within HC premises to feed strays, the lawyer agreed to tender an unconditional apology.

Counsel for Advocate Ankita Shah submitted that she would file an affidavit of unconditional apology by the next date while Deputy Commissioner - Dr. Gajendra Pandhari Mahalle tendered his apology during the hearing

9. PIL In Bombay High Court Alleges Expired Bread Being Sold In Markets, Says 'Best Before' Label Meaningless Without Manufacturing Date

Case Title: Kameshwar Ramnaresh Tiwari v. Union of India & Ors.

A PIL has been filed in the Bombay High Court alleging sale of stale, unhygienic and expired bread and other bakery items to the public in general and in particular to the residents of slum areas of Mumbai.

The PIL seeks directions to the manufacturers to compulsorily print the manufacturing date on the packets of bread, cookies, pavs and other bakery items.

10. Bombay High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance of Police Brutality on Lawyer In Goa's Porvorim

Case Title: High Court On His Own Motion v. State of Goa

Taking suo motu cognisance of an incident of alleged assault on a lawyer by constables of Porvorim police station, the Bombay High Court at Goa issued notice to the State government and Director General of Police, Goa.

A division bench of Justice MS Sonak and Bharat Deshmpande directed the State to file a preliminary affidavit apprising the Court of steps taken in the matter, and the relevant medical case papers of advocate Gajanan Sawant.