Bombay High Court
Suit Cannot Be Dismissed On Grounds Of Res Judicata Without Giving Party An Opportunity To Respond: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has ruled that the bar of res judicata under Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) cannot be invoked for the first time in a final judgment without framing an issue or giving parties an opportunity to respond. It has set aside a single judge's judgment that dismissed a suit invoking res judicata at the decree stage without prior notice.A division bench of...
Marriages 'Sacrosanct' In Hindus But Misuse Of Domestic Violence Act A Menace, Courts Must Encourage Settlement: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court recently while quashing a section 498A IPC case against a family observed that marital discords have now-a-days become a menace in the society and that because of the two persons fighting over petty issues, the concept of marriage, which is 'sacrosanct' for Hindus is suffering a setback. A division bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Mahendra Nerlikar noted the 'trend'...
Courts Cannot Mandate Retrospective Correction Of Errors In Legislation: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that courts cannot issue writs directing the legislature to correct alleged “clerical errors” in enacted laws or to give retrospective effect to legislative changes. It held that even if a change in the customs tariff is perceived as corrective or clarificatory, granting retrospective effect to such changes falls exclusively within the legislative...
Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 7 - July 13
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 259 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 280]Sujal Mangala Birwadkar vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 259UNS Women Legal Association (Regd) vs Bar Council of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 260Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 261Srinwati Mukherji vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom)...
Right To Life Cannot Be Denied To Suspect, Obligation Of State & Courts To Ensure It Is Not Violated: Bombay High Court
The guarantee of 'right to life and liberty' cannot be denied to a suspect who is sought to be made an accused on an investigation and it is the obligation of the State and also of the Courts to ensure that there is no infringement of this 'indefeasible' right, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court held on Friday. Single-judge Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, while granting bail to a...
Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up June 23 - June 29
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 231 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 243]Shireen Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy vs Jamsheed Mehli Poncha, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 231Sudhir Brijendra Jain vs Rajendra Dhedya Gavit, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 232ABC vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 233Chetan Ahire vs Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 234Union of India Through The General Manager Central Railway vs PLR HC...
GST Order Can't Be A Copy-Paste Of Showcause Notice, Independent Reasoning Must Be Present: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that a GST order can't be a copy-paste of the show cause notice and that independent reasoning must be present. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain stated that “simply cutting and pasting the allegations in the show cause notice or mechanically reciting them verbatim does not inspire confidence that due consideration has been shown to the cause, and...
Major Relief For Anil Ambani As Canara Bank Withdraws Order Classifying Reliance Comm Loan Account As 'Fraud'
In a relief for industrialist Anil Ambani, the Canara Bank recently informed the Bombay High Court that it has 'withdrawn' its order classifying his loan account, related to Reliance Communications, as "fraudulent account."A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale accepted the statement and disposed of the petition filed by Ambani challenging the validity of the...
GST TRAN-I Credit Can Be Revised Based On Manually Filed Excise Return: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that GST TRAN-I credit can be revised based on manually filed ER-1 Return. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain stated that “there were technical issues with respect to revising TRAN-1 and non-availability of electronic mode to revise excise return and it is only after directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Filco...
Mumbai's Development Work Can't Be Stopped But It Cannot Trample Heritage Structures: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on Thursday (July 10) while disposing of a petition filed by the trustees of the heritage JN Petit building alleging damages to the structure due to the underground construction work for the Metro III, held that though development works in a city like Mumbai cannot be stopped but the same cannot be permitted to run roughshod over the concerns of preserving and...
'Annual General Reports Made By SEBI Cannot Be Disclosed Without Following Procedure U/S 11 Of RTI Act': Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that before disclosing any information related to third parties, including stock exchanges like NSE and BSE, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), the concerned authority must strictly comply with the mandatory procedure laid down in Section 11 of the Act.A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain passed the ruling in a batch of...
GST Notice U/S 79(1)(c) Can't Be Issued Directly To Bank; Must Be Served To Actual Taxpayer: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that a GST notice under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act can't be issued directly to the bank. Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain observed that the notice under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act was not addressed to the assessee but directly to the bank. “Where such notice is served on a person, he can prove to the satisfaction of the officer...