Bombay High Court
Pandharpur Temples Act Doesn't Impair Rights Of Devotees, Rather Meant To Save Them From "Rapacity Of Priestly Class": State To Bombay High Court
The Pandharpur Temples Act 1973 giving the Maharashtra Government control over the Vitthal and Rukmini temples in Pandharpur was enacted to relieve its multitude of secular devotees and pilgrims from the “rapacity of the priestly classes”, the State government has told the Bombay High Court. Following a committee report and consensus from both houses of legislature, the hereditary rights...
Physically Handicapped Person Not Incapable Of Giving Threats: Bombay High Court Refuses To Quash Domestic Violence Case
Observing that a physically disabled person is not incapable of giving threats, the Bombay High Court recently refused to quash a domestic violence case against a disabled woman accused of abusing and threatening her daughter-in-law.Justice RM Joshi of the Aurangabad bench observed that whether any domestic violence was caused is a matter of trial, but prima facie the complainant was subjected...
'Invidious Discrimination Impermissible': High Court Paves Way For High Rise In Mumbai’s Fort Heritage Precinct, Strikes Off BMC Condition
The Bombay High Court recently quashed Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's (BMC) condition requiring a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) for the construction of a 69.90-meter-tall building in Mumbai’s Fort Heritage Precinct.A division bench of Justice GS Patel and Justice Kamal Khata observed that no such condition was imposed by the...
Development Agreement Not To Be Treated As Transfer Of Possession Of Land: Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice
The Bombay High Court has quashed the reassessment notice and held that the granting of a licence for the purpose of development of the flats and selling the same could not be said to be granting possession.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice N.K. Gokhale has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Seshasayee Steels (P) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income...
Bombay High Court Drops Contempt Proceedings After 5 State Govt Officers Tender Unconditional Apology
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dropped contempt proceedings against five state government officers after they tendered unconditional apologies to the court for not following its orders. A division bench of Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Jitendra Jain observed,“considering the fact that the contemnors are Government officials and that their apology as tendered to the Court as informed to...
Frame Policy To Regulate Celebration Of Festivals As Per Capacity Of Mumbai’s Public Spaces: Bombay High Court Urges State
The Bombay High Court today asked the Maharashtra government to frame a comprehensive policy for public celebration of festivals in Mumbai taking into account the city's increasing population and the limited capacity of its public spaces.A division bench of Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla opined that the current policy does not adequately consider the...
Bombay High Court Seeks Response From Haddi Producers In Suit Filed By Nawazuddin Siddiqui Over Alleged Dues, No Immediate Stay On Film's Release
The Bombay High Court today directed co-producer Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. (ZEEL) to file a reply affidavit in Nawazuddin Siddiqui’s specific performance suit seeking payment of over Rs. 5 Crores additional fees as lead actor in film Haddi.Justice SM Modak refused Siddiqui’s prayer for ad interim relief seeking directions to ZEEL to deposit the amount with the court and posted...
After Lawyer's No Show, Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Probe Into Source Of Funds Used By CM Eknath Shinde In 2022 Dusshera Rally
The Bombay High Court today dismissed a PIL seeking probe against Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and others for allegedly spending "Rs. 10 crore or more" for holding Dussehra rally at the MMRDA grounds.A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor dismissed the PIL after the petitioner’s advocate Nitin Satpute failed to appear before the court on three...
Write-Off Of A Bad Debt Can’t Be Held To Be An Asset Under Section 153A(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that a write-off of a bad debt cannot be held to be an asset under section 153A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla has observed that since the write-off of bad debt cannot be held to be an asset, clause (a) of the 4th proviso to Section 153A(1) of the Act would bar any assessment that is proposed to...
Bombay High Court Refuses To Stay Nawazuddin Siddiqui Starrer HADDI's OTT Release On Plea By Vivek Oberoi
The Bombay High Court has refused relief to actor-producer Vivek Oberoi seeking to stall the release of Nawazuddin Siddiqui starrer ‘Haddi.’ The movie will hit OTT screens on Thursday.Justice Manish Pitale deprecated the petitioners for failing to approach the court earlier. “As on today, this Court finds that the petitioners waited all along and when the movie was declared to be...
Bombay High Court Asks BMC About Steps Taken To Ensure Eco-Friendly Immersion Of Ganesh Idols At Aarey Colony Lakes
The Bombay High Court on Monday sought to know from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) the measures it has implemented to ensure eco-friendly idol immersion in the lakes inside of Aarey Milk Colony during the upcoming Ganpati Chaturthi festival.A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor was hearing a PIL filed by the NGO Vanshakti challenging...
Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up August 28 To September 3, 2023
Nominal Index [Citation 394 - 408]UPL Limited v. UOI 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 394Mohan Yeshwant Padawe & Ors v. State Of Maharashtra & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 395Kumar Kunal v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 396Heena Afrin Huzaifa Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 397Ankiti Bose v. Mahesh Murthy and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 398Sandeep Pandurang Patil v. State...