Legal Cell

High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad (Civil) 2025:BHC-AUG:29648 Discusses pre-emption rights, transfer of undivided shares, and procedural aspects of property disputes. List of Laws: The Hindu Succession Act; The Transfer of Property Act; Code of Civil Procedure Legal Discussion: The Hindu Succession Act: The judgment extensively discusses Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, which deals with the preferential right to acquire property in certain cases. The court interprets this section to determine whether the plaintiffs and defendant nos. 8 and 9 can be treated as Class I heirs. The significance of this interpretation lies in establishing the conditions under which the right of preemption can be exercised. The court examines the status of the family, the time of death, the time when partition opens, the inter se relationship, the manner in which the interest devolves as per Section 6 of the Act, and the existence of co-parcenary or birth ri...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:45681-DB Elucidates the interpretation and application of Section 47, concerning non-discrimination in employment based on disability. List of Laws: The Person with Disability (Equal Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 Legal Discussion: The Person with Disability (Equal Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995: The judgment extensively discusses Section 47 of the Act, which pertains to non-discrimination in government employment for individuals who acquire a disability during their service. The court emphasizes the mandatory nature of Section 47, citing the Supreme Court's view that it casts a statutory obligation on the employer to protect such employees. The court interprets Section 47(1) to mean that an employer cannot dispense with or reduce the rank of an employee who acquires a disability during service. If the employee is...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Civil) 2025:BHC-AS:45727-DB Clarifies the limitation period for initiating disciplinary proceedings against retired government servants, ensuring fairness and timely closure. List of Laws: Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 Legal Discussion: Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972: The judgment extensively discusses Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, specifically Rule 9(2)(b)(ii). This rule stipulates that departmental proceedings cannot be initiated against a government servant regarding events that occurred more than four years before the institution of such proceedings, if not instituted while the government servant was in service. The court interprets this rule as a "protective barrier" against belated disciplinary actions, reinforcing the principle of fairness and the legitimate expectation of finality in service records. The significance of this interpretation lies in settin...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Criminal) 2025:BHC-AS:45538-DB Discusses constitutional safeguards in preventive detention and principles for assessing detention orders. List of Laws: Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India; The Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Dangerous Persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons engaged in Black-marketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (MPDA Act); General Principles of Law Legal Discussion: Article 226 of the Constitution of India: The petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 to challenge the detention order. This is significant because Article 226 grants High Courts the power to issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights and for any other purpose. The court's acceptance of the petition under this article confirms the availability of judicial review in prevent...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Criminal) 2025:BHC-NAG:11205-DB Delineates the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offenses, and discusses principles of fair procedure. List of Laws: The Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Code of Criminal Procedure Legal Discussion: The Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment discusses several sections of the IPC in relation to a complaint alleging criminal breach of trust, misappropriation, cheating, and criminal conspiracy. Specifically, Sections 420 (cheating), 403 (dishonest misappropriation of property), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant or agent), 417 (punishment for cheating), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) are examined. The court analyzes whether the allegations in the FIR constitute these offenses or if the matter is primarily a civil disput...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Criminal) 2025:BHC-NAG:11218 Discusses principles related to interim custody, interpretation of "owner", and High Court's supervisory jurisdiction. List of Laws: Constitution of India; The Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Code of Criminal Procedure; The Motor Vehicles Act Legal Discussion: Constitution of India: The judgment refers to Article 227 of the Constitution of India, under which the Writ Petition was filed. The petitioner challenged the common order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class and the Additional Sessions Judge. The significance lies in invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 to examine the correctness, legality, or propriety of the orders passed by the subordinate courts. This highlights the High Court's role as a guardian of justice, ensuring that lower courts function within their jurisdictional limits and adhere to principles of natura...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Criminal) 2025:BHC-NAG:11220 Discusses the interplay between IBC, company and consumer laws, and the moratorium's effect on legal proceedings. List of Laws: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; Companies Act; Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Legal Discussion: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: The judgment extensively discusses several sections of the IB Code, 2016. Section 3(27) defines 'property'. The court notes that the direction by the Consumer Commission to return the JCB machine upon payment of dues is akin to a monetary decree and falls within the definition of 'property' under this section. This is significant because it broadens the scope of 'property' under the IB Code to include such decrees, thereby potentially triggering the moratorium provisions. The practical implication is that even orders for specific performance involving assets can be stayed during insolv...

High Court of Bombay, Nagpur (Criminal) 2025:BHC-NAG:11221 Discusses the scope and limitations of Section 311 Cr.P.C. and the principles governing the recall of witnesses. List of Laws: The Code of Criminal Procedure; The Constitution of India; The Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; The Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013; The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Legal Discussion: The Code of Criminal Procedure: The judgment extensively discusses Section 311 Cr.P.C., concerning the power of the Court to examine witnesses at any stage. The petitioners sought to recall witnesses under this section, arguing that contradictions in their evidence were not adequately addressed during cross-examination. The court, however, rejected this app...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Original) 2025:BHC-OS:19583 Discusses judgment on admissions, limitation periods, and the probative value of admissions, applicable across legal domains. List of Laws: The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960; The Limitation Act, 1963; General Principles of Law Legal Discussion: The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: The judgment extensively discusses Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, which pertains to judgment on admissions. The court interprets Rule 6(1) as allowing the court to pronounce judgment at any stage of the suit, without waiting for the determination of any other question, where admissions of fact have been made in the pleadings or otherwise. The significance of this interpretation is that it provides a mechanism for expediting cases where the defendant has essentially conceded the plaintiff's claim. Rule 6(2) is also mentioned, stating that a decree shall be dr...

High Court of Bombay, Bombay (Original) 2025:BHC-OS:19600 Discusses limitation principles, interpretation of statutes, and Order VII Rule 11 CPC. List of Laws: The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; The Limitation Act, 1963; The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 Legal Discussion: The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: The judgment extensively discusses Order VII Rule 11 CPC, concerning the rejection of a plaint. The defendant sought rejection of the plaint, arguing the suit was barred by limitation. The court reiterated the principle that a suit hopelessly barred by limitation can be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11, preventing unnecessary protraction of proceedings. This interpretation aligns with established precedent aimed at preventing frivolous litigation. The practical implication is that courts must scrutinize plaints to ensure they disclose a cause of action and are not time-barred, saving judicial resources. The court also refers ...