Bombay High Court Weekly Roundup: March 21 To March 27, 2022

Nominal Index Dr. Sonal Pratapsingh Vahanwala v. Deputy District Collector, Dharavi The State of Maharashtra v Shadab Tabarak Khan Manojkumar Omprakash Dalmia vs Omprakash Dalmia and Others Shrikrupa Stone Crusher v State of Maharashtra and ors. Invesco Developing Markets Fund vs Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited Poorti Rent a Car and Logistics Pvt. Ltd. & ors. vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. & ors Mariyayi Machhimaar Sahkari Sansthya Maryadit Versus Department of Fisheries and others Securities and Exchange Board of India Versus Rajkumar Nagpal & Ors. Perizad Zorabian Irani Versus PCIT And Ors. CA. Manisha Mehta and ors. Vs The Board of Directors of Represented by its Managing Director of ICICI Bank and ors. RPG Enterprises Limited v Riju Ghoshal and anr Hriday Niraj Mehta vs. Umesh Jayantilal Mehta and OthersROUND-UP 1. Adopted Son Entitled To Take Adoptive Mother's Caste Even If Biological Father's Records Not Available: Bombay High Court Case Title: Dr. Sonal Pratapsingh Vahanwala v. Deputy District Collector, Dharavi Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 90 Observing that an adopted child becomes a family member of his adoptive parents "in all respects," the Bombay High Court directed authorities to issue a caste certificate to an 18-year-old based on his mother's scheduled caste identity. The Bench thus held that an adopted child would be entitled to take the caste identity of his adoptive mother, despite the caste authorities' insistence on making the child's biological father's records available. "One of the effects would be that the child would not get identity of mother and particularly caste of the mother. He would be without identity throughout his life. Similarly, very purpose of adopting child by the petitioner being a single mother would stand frustrated. In our opinion, such a situation could not be envisaged by law." 2. JJ Act | Child Cannot Be Automatically Tried As An Adult Even If It Commits Heinous Crime: Bombay High Court Case Title : The State of Maharashtra v Shadab Tabarak Khan Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 91 A single judge of the HC, held that under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 the Juvenile Justice Board has to assess a heinous offence to determine whether CCL is to be tried as an adult or juvenile. If the child above 16 years of age, the Board has to conduct a preliminary assessment with regard to his mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence, before deciding if the CCL can be tried as an adult. 3. "Greed, Acrimony & Deceit": Bombay HC Dismisses Contempt Plea Of Man Who Prima Facie Played Fraud On Supreme Court & High Court For Property Case Title: Manojkumar Omprakash Dalmia vs Omprakash Dalmia and Others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 92 Observing that "greed, acrimony and deceit" are clear from the son's conduct, the Bombay High Court dismissed the contempt petition he filed against his parents in connection with a property dispute and directed him pay them cost of Rs. 50,000. The petitioner son -Manoj Kumar Dalmia- alleged non-compliance of consent terms he allegedly signed with his parents, giving him more than his share in the couple's Santacruz flat, while also permitting his family to reside there. He would also get their second flat, which was their only source of livelihood. There was no reason whatsoever for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (parents) to ordinarily enter into the Consent Terms which basically seek to undo what they had been able to preserve thus far, by securing orders from this Court and the Supreme Court," a division bench noted about the "lopsided" terms. 4. Short Term Permit For Extraction Of Minor Minerals Can Be Granted On Application Made To Competent Authority, Public Auction Not Required: Bombay HC Case Title : Shrikrupa Stone Crusher v State of Maharashtra and ors. Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 93 The Bombay High Court considered whether grant of short term permit for extraction of minor minerals under Rule 59 of the Maharashtra Minor Mineral Extraction (Development and Regulation) Rules, 2013 (the Rules of 2013) ought to be preceded by holding public auction or whether such short term permit can be granted on the basis of an application made to the Competent Authority. "it was not the intention of the State that short term permit for minor minerals should be granted by way of public auction. The mode of granting such permit on an application made has been retained." 5. "Shareholder cannot be restrained from calling a meeting" - Bombay High Court Sets Aside Interim Order In Favour Zee Entertainment In Battle With Invesco Case Title: Invesco Developing Markets Fund vs Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited Citation: 2022...

Bombay High Court Weekly Roundup: March 21 To March 27, 2022

Sharmeen Hakim

Tags