Bombay High Court judgments

Bombay High Court reaffirms that insurers must compensate motor accident victims under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, even if the policy terms are breached. The insurer retains the right to recover the paid amount from the at-fault party, reinforcing the Act’s victim-centric mandate over contractual technicalities.

Bombay High Court reiterates that under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, compensation claims cannot be denied based on the deceased's alleged negligence. The ruling mandates fresh adjudication of claims in line with Supreme Court precedent, ensuring no-fault liability principles prevail in motor accident compensation cases.

Bombay High Court rules that appointing a Court Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC before the plaintiff completes evidence shifts the burden of proof unfairly. The decision clarifies that such appointments must follow evidence completion to prevent judicial overreach in encroachment disputes.

Bombay High Court rules that adherence to Section 154(2A) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement for revision applications. Non-compliance vitiates the entire proceeding, impacting recovery and cooperative dispute resolution mechanisms across Maharashtra.

Bombay HC rules that institutions with special statutes like the POSH Act need not conduct a separate departmental inquiry under CCS(CCA) Rules for major penalties like compulsory retirement. The ICC report under POSH Act is conclusive when institutional policies explicitly override general service rules, streamlining disciplinary proceedings for sexual harassment cases.

Bombay High Court rules that a corrigendum under MOFA Section 11(3) cannot be used to increase granted built-up area, as it violates the finality of quasi-judicial orders. The judgment underscores that administrative authorities lack inherent power to reopen concluded matters without express statutory authorization, impacting property developers and housing societies.

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench rules that pre-constitutional birth records establishing Scheduled Tribe identity prevail over later adverse entries and inconclusive affinity tests. The judgment reinforces the primacy of documentary evidence under Article 342, impacting caste verification processes for ST communities.

Bombay HC rules that a registered lease-cum-conveyance deed suffices to establish title transfer under MOFA, even without a Section 4 agreement. The judgment clarifies that housing societies can secure deemed conveyance rights based on registered documents alone, bypassing procedural gaps in builder agreements.

Bombay HC reaffirms that judicial records are conclusive and binding; parties must first seek correction from the same bench before approaching higher courts. The ruling underscores the limited scope for challenging courtroom conduct observations via writ petitions, reinforcing procedural discipline in litigation.

Bombay High Court rules that tribunals must award just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, including future prospects and loss of consortium, even in the absence of a cross-appeal. The court enhanced compensation to ₹5.7 lakh, reinforcing that statutory entitlements cannot be denied due to procedural omissions by claimants.

Bombay High Court rules that a higher court is not obligated to return a plaint under Order VII Rule 10 CPC merely because the suit value falls within a lower court's pecuniary jurisdiction. The decision underscores judicial discretion, allowing plaintiffs to proceed in a higher court even if the claim could have been filed in a lower forum, provided the court does not lack inherent jurisdiction.

Bombay HC rules that a housing society’s right to deemed conveyance under MOFA Section 11 remains valid even if the land is later reserved for public purposes. The court held that post-construction planning changes cannot retroactively invalidate lawful building rights, ensuring protection for flat owners and societies against arbitrary administrative actions.

Bombay HC quashes ex-parte maintenance order under Section 125 CrPC where the husband was not properly represented due to non-filing of vakalatnama. The court mandates a fresh hearing, reinforcing that procedural fairness is essential even in interim maintenance proceedings affecting livelihood and child welfare.

Bombay High Court affirms that a conviction under Section 354 IPC can rest solely on the victim’s testimony if it is consistent, credible, and withstands scrutiny. The ruling eliminates the need for corroborative evidence or physical proof, reinforcing victim-centric adjudication in modesty offence cases.

Bombay High Court holds that arbitrators cannot rely solely on broker’s internal risk management policies if they conflict with NSE regulations. The ruling mandates strict adherence to contractual safety cover rules, setting a precedent for F&O trading disputes where broker actions are challenged as unauthorized.

Bombay High Court rules that setting aside deregistration of a cooperative society under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act automatically revives its legal status, including the right to seek unilateral deemed conveyance under MOFA Section 11. The ruling clarifies that liquidation proceedings do not persist post-revival, empowering societies to bypass internal management disputes for conveyance applications.

Bombay High Court reinforces that interim stays in writ petitions remain in force until final disposal, rejecting the notion of automatic expiry after six months. The court held that authorities disobeying such orders commit contempt, underscoring judicial compliance as a non-negotiable obligation for public bodies and cooperative societies.

Bombay High Court rules that setting aside a Magistrate's investigation order under Section 156(3) CrPC does not terminate the complaint proceedings. The Magistrate must reconsider the complaint afresh under Chapter XV CrPC, ensuring the complainant's right to a merits-based adjudication is preserved.

Bombay HC rules that prolonged contractual service under PMGSY (over 10 years) creates an enforceable right to regularization, including back wages and consequential benefits. The judgment rejects artificial service breaks and underscores the state's obligation to absorb long-term contractual workers, impacting thousands of PMGSY employees across Maharashtra.

Bombay High Court sets aside a death sentence after finding gross violations of the accused's right to legal aid under Article 21, emphasizing that fair trial guarantees are non-negotiable in capital punishment cases. The ruling mandates a fresh trial, reinforcing that procedural lapses cannot compromise constitutional rights, especially where liberty or life is at stake.

Bombay High Court at Goa affirms eviction under the Goa Rent Act where tenants made unauthorized structural changes and failed to occupy the premises, setting a precedent for landlords seeking recovery of property under similar breaches. The ruling reinforces that tenant obligations extend beyond rent payment to property upkeep and lawful use.

Bombay High Court rules that execution of possession orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is a non-delegable, non-discretionary ministerial duty. Tahsildars and police must enforce such orders immediately without additional hearings, reinforcing secured creditors' rights to timely asset recovery.

Bombay High Court rules that an arbitral award based on unilateral arbitrator appointment is void ab initio and unenforceable, even at the execution stage. Parties are granted liberty to initiate fresh arbitration, with the limitation period excluded from the date of arbitration invocation. This reinforces the Supreme Court’s stance in Bhadra International on procedural fairness in arbitration.

Bombay High Court quashes prosecution under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, holding that inordinate delay in sample testing and failure to transmit a sample portion to the manufacturer violates mandatory procedural safeguards under Rule 45, rendering the prosecution untenable.