2134 Bombay High Court judgments explained in plain English: what was decided, the law applied and why it matters. Page 70 of 89.
Bombay High Court holds that Special Courts cannot dismiss Atrocities Act cases without examining prima facie applicability; must record factual findings before declining jurisdiction.
Bombay High Court treats media reports on tiger attacks in Pench Tiger Reserve as grounds for suo motu PIL, affirming judicial power to act on public interest concerns.
Bombay High Court holds Section 94 of LARR Act 2013 does not apply to acquisitions under National Highways Act 1956; petitioners may claim compensation for adverse effects on business or easement.
Bombay High Court holds that cost of constructing Permanent Transit Camp cannot be added to consideration for stamp duty under Guideline No. 26 of Maharashtra Stamp Act.
Bombay High Court holds that Special Reports under Section 81(5B) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act are preliminary and not revisable under Section 154, clarifying statutory procedure.
Bombay High Court holds that universities need not extend revaluation deadlines for individual students, upholding uniform application of rules under Article 14.
Bombay High Court holds that when an original agreement is pivotal to proving title in a licensee eviction suit, courts must compel its production, not dismiss applications as delay tactics.
Bombay High Court quashes FIR based on audit report later set aside, holding that continuation amounts to abuse of process under Section 482 CrPC and Article 226.
Bombay High Court grants interim injunction against defamatory video and newspaper article targeting a real estate developer, affirming that unsubstantiated allegations of fraud constitute actionable harm.
Bombay High Court holds that quasi-judicial authorities cannot revisit rejected deemed conveyance applications under MOFA Act; res judicata applies strictly.
Bombay High Court clarifies that courts cannot reappreciate evidence in departmental inquiries; misconduct proven on credible material must stand unless perverse or procedurally flawed.
Bombay High Court holds that interim relief under Section 9 cannot override third-party operations already underway; damages suffice where monetary compensation is adequate.
Bombay High Court holds that promoters cannot be excluded from Section 11 MOFA deemed conveyance proceedings without violating natural justice principles.
Bombay High Court holds that Section 93-A of the ESI Act does not impose liability on original employers for contributions during unauthorized third-party occupation post-lease expiry.
Bombay High Court holds that interim orders tainted by procedural illegality cannot be stayed, reinforcing that courts must not perpetuate unlawful judicial acts.
Bombay High Court holds that withdrawing bail deposit during stay violates court orders and invites contempt. Key precedent on compliance with interim relief.
Bombay High Court holds that interest under Section 4A(3) of the Employees' Compensation Act begins from the date of accident, not after one month. Key precedent for compensation claims.
Bombay High Court holds that alternate judges cannot hear review applications when the original judge is temporarily on leave, reinforcing mandatory procedural compliance under CPC Order XLVII Rule 5.
Bombay High Court holds that deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA cannot be withheld due to incomplete construction; civil remedies remain available for contractual disputes.
Bombay High Court grants bail in infant death case, holding Section 304 IPC not attracted due to absence of mens rea or direct causation. Key bail conditions outlined.
Bombay High Court holds that judicial findings in civil suits bind slum rehabilitation authorities; mere inclusion in Annexure II cannot override proven possession through family lineage.
Bombay High Court holds that Sub-Divisional Officers cannot demand pre-constitutional documents for caste certificates under Maharashtra Caste Certificate Act, 2000.
Bombay High Court holds that right to travel abroad under Article 21 is not absolute when petitioner has defaulted on massive debts, absconded from foreign jurisdiction, and shown no bonafide intent to repay.
Bombay High Court holds that denying a transferee pendente lite the chance to adduce evidence violates natural justice, mandating remand even if counsel acted without instructions.