Home
/

High Courts
/

Bombay High Court
/
Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up:...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: 14 October - 20 October, 2024

Sanjana Dadmi

21 Oct 2024 6:15 PM IST

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.

No Privity Of Contract: Bombay HC Rejects 31.77 Million USD Appeal By Insurance Companies Against Company Providing Airport Handling Services

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.

Scope Of Examination By Referral Court U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Is Limited, Substantive Issues To Be Dealt With By Tribunal: Bombay High Court

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.

"Possible That Daughter Implicated Father In False Rape Case Due To Matrimonial Dispute Between Parents": Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Man

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.

"Painful To Stay In Indian Jails": Bombay HC Directs Complainant To Pay Rs 4.2 Lakhs Compensation To Man Wrongly Jailed At His Instance

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.

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act To Challenge Award Passed U/S 18(4) Of MSMED Act Is Governed By Agreement Between Parties: Bombay HC

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.

Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Election Of Shiv Sena (UBT) Leader Anil Desai To 18th Lok Sabha

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.

Failed To Comply With S.23(4) Of MVAT Act Along With Non-Application Of Mind & Legal Malafide: Bombay HC Quashes Assessment, Imposes 50K Cost On Dept

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.

[Seat vs Venue] Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitrator's Discretion To Change Venue Of Arbitral Proceedings

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.

Bombay HC Quashes Session Judge's Suo Moto Exercise Of Revision Power, Says 'Uncalled Activism' Would Create Hindrance In Legal Proceedings

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.”

Rejecting Plaint Citing SARFAESI Act When Pleadings Claiming Fraud Are Under Specific Relief Act, Amounts To Miscarriage Of Justice: Bombay HC

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.”

Hope Election Commission Will Develop Some Module To Avoid 'Bogus Voting': High Court On MLA's Plea Ahead Of Maharashtra Assembly Elections

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.

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Lawyer For Shouting "Pannas Khoke Ekdum Okay" Against Shiv Sena (Shinde) Leader

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.

Rejection Of Application For Voluntary Cancellation Of GST Registration Didn't Contain Reasons: Bombay HC Quashes Rejection Order

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.

Other orders/Observations:

Bombay High Court Asks Centre To File Affidavit On Whether It Has Taken Any Decision To Ban Plastic Flowers

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.

"Violates Right To Education": Parents Of School Children Approach Bombay High Court Against 'Poll Duties' For Teachers Amid Exams

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.