Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The High Court held that employees who have worked for six months or more in a particular year would be entitled to the benefit of annual increment and their retiral benefits would be calculated by reckoning such increment while calculating their last drawn wages.
Holding that FDA’s recalled restrictions on ACILOC drug stocks stood neutralised, the Court directed fresh show-cause notices under Rule 85, Drugs Rules, 1945, before any further action.
The High Court held that the enquiry under Section 12-A(1), Commercial Courts Act is limited to whether the suit genuinely contemplated urgent interim relief and that the plaint must be examined holistically without adjudicating the merits of the interim relief.
The Bombay High Court held that employees who had rendered more than six months of qualifying service from the date of their last annual increment could not be denied the benefit of annual increment merely because they retired before 1 July.
The judgment provides important guidance on the interpretation of the exception to mandatory pre-institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act. It clarifies that while the exception must be construed strictly, courts must assess urgency on the basis of the overall factual matrix rather than a narrow or merits-based inquiry.
The High Court held that the victim’s testimony was natural, credible and inspiring of confidence, while the trial court’s appreciation of evidence was not only unreasonable but perverse, rendering its conclusions untenable and contrary to any possible view of the evidence.
The Supreme Court Collegium, in its meeting held on 6 August 2026, recommended the elevation of Justice V. Kameswar Rao, Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge, Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra as Chief Justices of the Patna, Calcutta, Bombay, and Punjab and Haryana High Courts, respectively.
The Bombay High Court held that a litigant cannot remain absent from proceedings for years and later seek indulgence on the ground of a supposed bona fide misunderstanding.
The Court clarified that appointments made unilaterally without contractual authority or consent would be void, subject to the Court’s clarification regarding unsuccessful prior challenges.
The Court held that a registered sale deed supported by receipt of consideration and transfer of title cannot be contradicted by an unregistered agreement, and in the absence of dishonest intention from inception, no offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC is made out.
Three government canteens, a uniform 98% score, and not a single insect in sight, until a surprise inspection found flies, cockroaches, and a refrigerator “in shambles.” Meanwhile, a private restaurant lost its licence over a banana with black dots.
When a taxpayer told the Bombay High Court he was staring down a fourth round of arguments after the matter was heard thrice without any pronouncement of judgment, the Court didn’t just fix his case, it ordered every ITAT in the country to start following the 90-day rule under Rule 34, Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.
The Bombay High Court restored a food business licence suspended under the proviso to Section 32(3), Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, holding that once fresh inspections conducted pursuant to the Court’s orders demonstrated 95 per cent compliance and graded the establishment as “Compliance/Satisfactory”, continuance of the suspension no longer served the preventive object for which it had originally been imposed.
The Court held that with adequate material like a DNA test and joint acknowledgment of parentage, Section 15, Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 permits correction of the birth certificate to replace the former husband’s name with that of the biological father.
The Court observed that modern cooperative housing societies have evolved into self-contained entities providing numerous services and amenities, making timely payment of maintenance charges essential for meeting operational expenses and statutory obligations.
Bombay High Court grants adinterim relief to practicing Advocate who contends that criminal liability has been foisted upon him for legal opinion rendered in professional capacity.
the High Court observed that there can never be more shocking heinous crime when a father is charged for committing sexual assault on his own daughter.
Police entered a woman’s bedroom without a woman constable, seized her mobile phone without a seizure panchnama, and recorded no grounds in the case diary. Bombay HC holds both the search under Section 185 and the seizure under Section 105 of the BNSS violated mandatory procedure and Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court held that a 21-year-old woman, being an adult, is legally competent to decide her residence, marriage, and education, and directed that she shall not be compelled to return to her parental home or treated as a missing person, as these matters of personal choice are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Bombay High Court declined interim relief in a copyright infringement and passing-off action concerning rival logo device marks, holding that resemblance between logos is not by itself actionable unless supported by evidence demonstrating copying or reasonable opportunity of access to the claimant’s work.