Bombay High Court judgments

The Bombay High Court has ruled that once an appeal under the SARFAESI Act is infructuous, the DRAT loses all jurisdiction to entertain or decide collateral disputes over auctioned properties. This clarifies that appellate tribunals cannot expand their scope to protect defaulting borrowers after the core dispute is moot, safeguarding auction purchasers' rights and preventing procedural abuse.

Bombay HC rules that adoption under Hindu law takes effect from the execution date of the adoption deed, not its registration date. The court held that delayed registration cannot disqualify an adoptive heir from compassionate appointment, reinforcing the legal validity of adoption from the date of execution.

Bombay High Court rules that a verbal property sale agreement can be specifically enforced if the defendant's silence after a legal notice constitutes conduct under Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act. The judgment underscores that preponderance of probabilities can validate verbal contracts in real estate disputes, impacting property buyers and sellers relying on informal agreements.

Bombay High Court holds that pensionary benefits, once earned through service, cannot be withheld due to post-retirement caste certificate invalidation. The ruling protects retirees from administrative actions taken after superannuation, reinforcing the principle of service continuity and vested rights under service law.

Bombay HC rules that a developer's prolonged delay in a housing society redevelopment project disentitles it to interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. The court prioritized the society members' right to safe housing over the developer's contractual claims, setting a precedent for balancing equities in stalled projects.

The Bombay High Court has set aside multiple arbitral awards where the arbitrator was unilaterally appointed, affirming that such appointments are void from the outset under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. This ruling reinforces the Supreme Court’s position in Bhadra International, ensuring parties cannot circumvent neutrality requirements even after award issuance - impacting corporate contracts, construction disputes, and commercial arbitration strategies nationwide.

The Bombay High Court ruled that termination for negligent driving cannot override the mandatory reinstatement mandate under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, unless the position entails fiduciary responsibility. Back wages were denied due to the petitioner’s post-termination employment, reinforcing that reinstatement and back pay are distinct remedies. This clarifies the limits of 'loss of confidence' as a justification in non-fiduciary roles.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that homemakers suffering 30% permanent disability are entitled to future prospects compensation under the Kirti v. Oriental Insurance framework, rejecting the Tribunal’s flawed reduction to 15%. This sets a critical precedent for non-wage-earning claimants in motor accident cases, ensuring equitable valuation of domestic labor in compensation awards.

The Bombay High Court ruled that when a plaint is challenged under Order VII Rule 11 for technical defects-such as inadequate court fee or lack of positive declaration-the court must first allow amendment rather than reject the suit outright. This procedural safeguard prevents unnecessary re-filing, reduces litigation burden, and protects plaintiffs from being penalized for curable formalities, reinforcing procedural justice in civil litigation.

The Bombay High Court ruled that landlords need not produce sanctioned plans to evict tenants for unauthorized permanent alterations-admissions during cross-examination and photographic proof are sufficient to establish breach of tenancy terms. This clarifies the evidentiary standard for eviction cases under rent control laws, empowering landlords to act decisively against structural violations without costly documentation.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that caste certificates based on pre-constitutional documents - such as revenue records and school certificates from before 1950 - are conclusive proof of Scheduled Tribe status, and administrative affinity tests cannot override them. This sets a critical precedent for tribal claimants facing scrutiny in government appointments, ensuring historical documentation trumps subjective tribal linkage assessments.

Bombay HC rules that farmers are entitled to compensation for crop damage caused by Schedule-II protected parrots, even if the species is not explicitly listed in the Government Resolution. The judgment interprets the Wildlife Protection Act to include such damages under compensation schemes, reinforcing farmers' rights against wildlife-induced losses.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a public servant commits an offence merely by demanding or accepting a bribe-even if they lack the official authority to perform the requested act. This clarifies that the law targets the corrupt act itself, not the outcome, strengthening accountability across all levels of public service.

The Bombay High Court enforced a 35-year-old verbal property sale contract not merely due to silence, but because the defendant’s conduct - accepting partial payment and failing to rebut a detailed notice - created a preponderance of probabilities that a binding agreement existed. This sets a critical precedent for oral real estate deals where written documentation is absent but conduct strongly implies mutual assent.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that after seven years of continuous, unblemished service, an appointment made subject to the outcome of a pending Special Leave Petition can no longer be treated as provisional. Petitioners are now entitled to regularization and must be considered for promotion, irrespective of the unresolved SLP, affirming that prolonged service overrides conditional language in appointment letters.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that constitutional writs for habeas corpus cannot be invoked to bypass ongoing custody proceedings in Family Court, even where parental disputes are acrimonious. This reinforces that child welfare matters must be resolved through specialized family jurisprudence, not constitutional remedies, unless illegal detention is proven - safeguarding the integrity of the Family Court’s parens patriae authority.

Bombay High Court grants bail in POCSO case but clarifies that minor's consent is legally void, even in consensual relationships. Key bail conditions outlined.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the three-year limitation period to seek a judicial declaration of death under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act starts from the date the police issue a certificate confirming permanent disappearance, not from the date the person went missing. This clarifies a critical procedural hurdle for heirs and successors seeking to settle property, inherit assets, or obtain official death records after prolonged absences.

The Bombay High Court has declared all arbitral awards void where arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, affirming the Supreme Court’s position in Bhadra International. Crucially, it permits parties to initiate fresh arbitration by excluding the entire period of the invalid proceeding from the limitation period, offering a rare procedural lifeline to claimants caught in defective appointments.

Bombay High Court rules that a successor developer assuming project obligations via a development agreement is bound by RERA, 2016 to honor allotment commitments to buyers, even without direct contractual privity. The judgment reinforces RERA’s consumer protection mandate, ensuring buyers retain rights against subsequent developers.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that when an insurer pays part of an insurance claim, it constitutes an admission of liability for the entire claim, and any dispute over the unpaid balance relates only to quantum-not arbitrability. This clarifies that policyholders can compel arbitration for residual amounts even when insurers attempt to sever liability from payment, reinforcing the enforceability of arbitration clauses in commercial insurance disputes.

Bombay High Court rules that demonetised currency notes seized before the exchange cut-off date but returned post-deadline must still be exchanged if their legitimacy is undisputed. The judgment protects citizens from procedural delays caused by state authorities, reinforcing natural justice under the Specified Bank Notes Act.

The Bombay High Court ruled that 'ABSUN PHARMA' is deceptively similar to 'SUN PHARMA', constituting trademark infringement and passing off under Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act and common law. Exporting goods to Africa does not exempt the defendant from liability in India, reinforcing that consumer confusion in the domestic market is the decisive factor.

Bombay HC reaffirms that cross-examination is an invaluable right under the Code of Civil Procedure, essential for a just determination of disputes. The court set aside a 'no-cross order' where an advocate's conflict denied the defendant this right, permitting cross-examination in two sessions with costs to balance fairness and efficiency.