Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 1 to September 7, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 356 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 359]Sanjay Shirke vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 356Tivoli Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 357Nilangekar Taluka Eksangh Kruti Samiti vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 358Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. vs Inspector of Police, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 359Judgments/Final Order:Citizens' Right To Clean Water Prevails: Bombay High Court Declines Plea To Immerse 'Eco-Friendly' Ganesh Idol In Natural LakeCase Title: Sanjay Shirke vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 356The Bombay High Court on Thursday (September 4) refused permission to citizens of Mumbai's plush Malabar Hill area to immerse their "eco-friendly" Ganesha idols at city's Banganga Talao (lake). A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Aarti Sathe refused to grant any relief to the petitioner Sanjay Shirke. According to Shirke, he and other residents of the Malabar Hill area have been immersing their eco-friendly idols in the Banganga Talao every year for several years altogether. However, this year the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) issued a fresh set of guidelines on August 26, by which it prohibited the immersion of even the eco-friendly idols in natural waterbodies.AO Can Determine Annual Value Of Property Higher Than Municipal Rateable Value U/S 22 Income Tax Act: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Tivoli Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-TaxCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 357The Bombay High Court stated that the assessing officer (AO) can determine the annual value of the property higher than the municipal rateable value under Section 22 of the Income Tax Act. Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 deals with the "taxability of 'Income from House Property”. It says the annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner, other than such portions of such property as he may occupy for the purposes of any business or profession carried on by him the profits of which are chargeable to income-tax, shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Income from house property".'Creating Additional Tehsildar Office Does Not Tantamount To New Revenue Area Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code': Bombay High CourtCase Title: Nilangekar Taluka Eksangh Kruti Samiti vs State of MaharashtraCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 358The Bombay High Court has held that the creation of an office of an Additional Tehsildar for administrative convenience does not amount to the creation or constitution of a new revenue area under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The Court clarified that such appointments are permissible under Sections 7 and 13 of the Code and do not require compliance with the procedure of previous publication and notification mandated for altering revenue areas.Bombay High Court Orders Man To Do Cleaning & Mopping At Mumbai's JJ Hospital For Filing Bogus FIR Against Zee TV ShowCase Title: Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. vs Inspector of PoliceCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 359The Bombay High Court recently ordered a man to do cleaning and mopping work at the government-run JJ hospital after noting that he had filed a bogus complaint against Zee TV for its new show titled 'Tum Se Tum Tak' which revolves around the love story of a nearly 46-year-old man and a 19-year-old girl. A division bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad was hearing a petition filed by Zee TV seeking to quash the First Information Report (FIR) lodged against the channel by one Mahendra Sanjay Sharma over its new serial.Other Developments:Bombay High Court Directs Protestors Seeking Maratha Reservation To Vacate Mumbai Roads By TomorrowThe Bombay High Court today (September 01) directed activist Manoj Jarange and his supporters, who are protesting for Maratha reservations to vacate all streets and restore normalcy in Mumbai by tomorrow. Jarange has been on a hunger strike at Azad Maidan since Friday (August 29), demanding 10 percent reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category. His supporters said he stopped consuming water from Monday.Maratha Quota Stir: Bombay High Court Says Manoj Jarange 'Illegally' Continuing Protest At Azad Maidan, Asks Him To Vacate Site By 3PMThe Bombay High Court on Tuesday (September 2) slamed Maratha Leader Manoj Jarange for continuing to sit on "fast unto death" at Mumbai's Azad Maidan seeking reservation for the Maratha Community, questioning him over steps taken to control crowd after finding that 1 Lakh people had reached the city. A division bench bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Aarti Sathe asked Jarange and all protesters to vacate the site before "3PM today", else necessary action...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 1 to September 7, 2025

Narsi Benwal

Tags