Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: 26 August - 01 September, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 443 To 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 460Nominal Index:MARS Enterprise vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 443 Madhukar Baburao Shete vs. Yogesh Trimbak Shete & Anr, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 444T.J. Thomas & Ors. vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 445Abhijit Padale vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 446Anil Govind Ganu & anr. vs. Innovative Technomics Pvt. Ltd. & ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 447ADP vs State of Maharashtra,n2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 448Dr. Pradeep Mehta & anr. vs. UPI & ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 449Tilak Ventures Ltd vs. The Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 450Rajiv Saxena vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 451Aashish Niranjan Shah vs. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 452Sheth Motishaw Lalbaug Jain Charities vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 453Milind Kashinath Kamble vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 454Manish Ramniklal Sawla vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 455MS vs HS, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 456Chrisella Valanka Kushi Raj Naidu vs Ministry of External Affairs, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 457Pidilite Industries vs Premier Stationery Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Contempt Petition 28560 of 2024), 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 458Shahrukh Ziya Mohammad vs State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 459Mallinath Vithal Vathakar vs The Registrar, University of Mumbai, 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 460Judgments/ Final orders:Owner/Occupier Of Property Will Have To Pay Water Tax, Water Benefit Tax Even If They Do Not Consume Water From BMC: Bombay High CourtCase Title: MARS Enterprise vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 443 In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court last week held that an owner of a property will have to pay the water tax and the water benefit tax irrespective of whether the owner or occupier of the property uses the water facility or not.Mandatory Procedures Cannot Be Bypassed To Show Large Number Of Case Disposals In Lok Adalat: Bombay High CourtCase title: Madhukar Baburao Shete vs. Yogesh Trimbak Shete & AnrCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 444The Bombay High Court has observed that the Authority or Committee organising Lok Adalat cannot directly transfer pending cases to the Lok Adalat without a reference order from the concerned court, as stipulated under Section 20(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The Court emphasised that the mandatory procedures outlined in the Act cannot be bypassed only to show high figures of disposal of cases, as it would defeat the very purpose of Lok Adalat.MHADA & BMC Failed To Take Action Against Developer, Nexus Apparent: Bombay HC In Plea Against Non Issuance Of Occupation CertificateCase Title: T.J. Thomas & Ors. vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 445While hearing a plea against non issuance of Occupation Certificate (OC) by the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Board (MHADA) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (BMC) for certain property, the Bombay High Court said that the authorities' conduct in failing to take necessary actions against the developer pointed to a nexus between them. A division bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Kamal Khata said, “The nexus between MHADA, BMC, and the Developer is apparent. There is no explanation for why, to date, the MHADA has not obtained the surrender of valuable property or compensation from the developer. The MHADA is not some private entity that can waive such conditions at its whims or fancies or foist such conditions indirectly on the tenants or occupants by pressuring them to pressure the developer. The developer has not even bothered to appear because it has nothing to lose and has already gained everything, thanks to the dereliction and unreasonable approach of the MHADA and BMC in this matter.” No Person Can Be Arrested Merely Based On Allegations Of Committing A Crime: Bombay High Court On 'Illegal Arrest' of JournalistCase Title: Abhijit Padale vs State of MaharashtraCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 446No person can be arrested merely because s/he is facing allegations of having committed some offence, the Bombay High Court said recently while holding the arrest of a Thane-based journalist by the Mumbai Police, illegal. It also ordered the Mumbai Police to pay Rs 25,000 compensation to the petitioner. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan noted that the journalist - Abhijit Padale, was arrested under charges of extortion and criminal intimidation, both of which provide for maximum punishment upto four years and three years, respectively.[Payment Of Gratuity Act] Mere Reflection In Balance Sheet Doesn't Give Rise To Gratuity Claim In Absence Of Underlying Agreement: Bombay HCCase title: Anil Govind Ganu & anr. vs. Innovative Technomics Pvt. Ltd. & ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 447While considering the claim for payment of gratuity by the Directors of a company, the Bombay ...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: 26 August - 01 September, 2024

Sanjana Dadmi

Tags