Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 12 To December 18, 2022

Nominal Index [Citation 490 – 500] 1. Atul S/o Raju Dongre and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 490 2. Sudeep Suhas Kulkarni and Anr. v. Abbas Bahadur Dhanani 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 491 3. Damodhardas Govindprasad Sangi v. Fatehsinh s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 492 4. Shrichand @ Chandanmal Sugnamal Panjwani v. Ahamed Ismayil Valodia and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 493 5. Kiran Dattatraya Shedke v. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 494 6. Dr. Hany Babu Musaliyarveettil Tharayil v. National Investigation Agency & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 495 7. Harishchandra Sitaram Khanorkar v. State of Maharashtra 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 496 8. Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 497 9. Chowgule & Company (P) Ltd. v. JCIT 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 498 10. J. P. Parekh & Son & Anr. v. Naseem Qureshi & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 499 11. Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Board of Trustees, Mumbai Khadi and Village Industries Association 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 500 Reports/Judgments 1. Marrying Another Woman Without Wife's Consent Constitutes Cruelty U/S 498-A IPC: Bombay High Court Reiterates Case Title: Atul S/o Raju Dongre and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 490 The Bombay High Court held that a husband marrying another woman during the existence of first marriage and without his wife's consent constitutes cruelty under section 498-A of the IPC. If the performance of second marriage during subsistence of the first marriage is not interpreted as cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC, it would frustrate the legislative intent to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relative of her husband, the court held 2. Branding A Child As "Illegitimate" In Itself Amounts To Harassment: Bombay High Court Case Title: Sudeep Suhas Kulkarni and Anr. v. Abbas Bahadur Dhanani Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 491 The Bombay High Court recently granted guardianship of a minor to her biological parents reiterating that welfare of the minor should be the paramount factor and it cannot be subordinated to the personal law of the minor. Justice Manish Pitale observed that the parents' plea cannot be rejected merely because Muslim law indicates that a child born outside marriage has no right to inheritance or descent. Commenting on the usage of the term 'illegitimate' for such children, the court said, "for no fault of the child, it is branded illegitimate for the world at large, which in itself amounts to harassment to the child." 3. [O VI R 17 CPC] Merely Because Proposed Amendments Relate To Same Property, Doesn't Imply That Party Can Change Nature Of Suit: Bombay High Court Case Title: Damodhardas Govindprasad Sangi v. Fatehsinh s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar and Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 492 The Bombay High Court recently reiterated that an amendment that completely changes the nature of the suit cannot be permitted. Justice Sandeep V. Marne of the Aurangabad bench set aside a trial court order which allowed amendment to prayers in a property dispute despite observing that the plaintiffs were bringing a new case through the amendment. The trial court allowed the amendment stating that since the amendment is in respect of the same property, the plaintiffs can seek the prayer as to how they are entitled to the suit property. The court said that this reason is erroneous and the trial court completely lost sight of the fact that the amendment would change the nature of the suit entirely. 4. Enforcement Of Lok Adalat Award Does Not Require Payment Of Stamp Duty/ Registration: Bombay High Court Case Title: Shrichand @ Chandanmal Sugnamal Panjwani v. Ahamed Ismayil Valodia and Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 493 The Bombay High Court recently held that a Lok Adalat award, being equivalent to a civil court decree, can be enforced via an execution suit and does not require registration and payment of stamp duty for enforcement. Justice Sandeep V. Marne stated that Lok Adalat awards are fully executable. There is no question of a specific performance suit for the settlement which the Lok Adalat has decreed, the court held. 5. A Person Cannot Be Subjected To Rigors Of Externment By Relying On Same Cases, Violative Of Article 19: Bombay High Court Case Title: Kiran Dattatraya Shedke v. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 494 The Bombay High Court has said that subjecting a person to externment by relying upon the same cases, which were also subject matter of the previous orders of externment, is violative of Article 19 of Constitution. Quashing a third order of externment passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Nashik,...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 12 To December 18, 2022

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags