Bombay High Court

Scroll Down To Discover

Sort by:

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Reviews Challenge to Removal of APMC Members for Alleged Misconduct. Petitioners Asserted That Demand for Minimum Support Price Did Not Constitute Misconduct Under Section 17 of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963....

The writ petitions arose from orders of removal of elected members of Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Ghatanji, under Section 17 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Develo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Examines Writ Petition No. 3506 of 2025 Involving Adoption by Parents with Disabled Biological Children. Court Assesses Whether Adoption Norms Provide for Relaxation in Such Circumstances....

The petitioners, a married couple, were Prospective Adoptive Parents. They had two biological daughters, one born on 24 August 2014 and the other on 20 June 2019. The elder daughter was diagnosed with...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4107 OF 2024...

The petitioner, Anna Maruti Shinde, aged 52 years, unemployed, residing at Kharvai, Badlapur East, District Thane, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 4107 of 2024 in the High Court of Judicature at Bomb...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Adjudicates Criminal Appeal No. 798 of 2018 Filed by Convict. Bench Reserves Judgment on 26 March 2025 and Pronounces on 7 April 2025....

The present proceedings pertain to Criminal Appeal No. 798 of 2018 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in its Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction. The appellant, Dattu alias Datta Bhika Tongare,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

WRIT PETITION NO.477 OF 2025...

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Dismisses Builder’s Writ Petition Challenging NCDRC’s Rejection of Condonation of 1132-Day Delay; No Perversity Found. Delay in Appeal Against State Commission Order Not Sufficiently Explained Under Section 23 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986....

The petitioners, a construction firm and its partners, launched a real estate project and received an investment of Rs. 6,50,000/- from the respondent, a flat purchaser, in 2010–2011. The project wa...