Bombay High Court
Patanjali Foods Moves Bombay High Court Against YouTube Channel For Making Defamatory Video, Demands ₹15.5 Crores In Damages
Patanjali Foods has approached the Bombay High Court against popular YouTube Channel 'Trustified Certification' demanding Rs 10.5 crores as damages for loss of reputation and Rs 5 crore as 'special damages' for causing injury to their brand by uploading an allegedly 'defamatory' video against its product 'Nutrela Soya Chunks.'The suit filed through advocate Apoorv Srivastava was listed before a single-judge bench of Justice Sharmila Deshmukh, before whom the defendant YouTube channel raised a...
Bombay High Court Orders Removal Of 'VISTARRAAH' Trademark Over Similarity To Air India's Vistara Airline
Holding that it was deceptively similar to Air India's VISTARA airline brand, the Bombay High Court has directed the removal of the trademark “VISTARRAAH” from the Trade Marks Register. Justice Arif S Doctor passed the order on December 10, 2025, while allowing a rectification petition filed by Air India. The Court held that permitting the disputed mark to remain on the register would be contrary to law and would undermine the integrity and purity of the trademark system. Air India told the...
Bombay High Court Temporarily Restrains Kataria Insurance Brokers From Using 'KATARIA' Trademark
The Bombay High Court has temporarily restrained Ahmedabad-based Kataria Insurance Brokers Private Limited from using the name “KATARIA INSURANCE” or any other name, mark or website containing the word “KATARIA” for insurance-related services. The court held that such use is deceptively similar to the registered trademark of Mumbai-based Kataria Jewellery Insurance Consultancy. Justice Arif S Doctor, while granting interim relief on December 8, 2025, held that the consultancy had made out a...
Extra Profit Received By Broker Due To Technical Glitch Not Unjust Enrichment: Bombay High Court Upholds Award In Favour Of Kotak Securities
The Bombay High Court has held that profits earned by a client by utilising an increased trading margin erroneously reflected due to a technical glitch in the broker's system cannot be treated as “unjust enrichment”. The Court observed that mere availability of margin created an opportunity to trade, but the profits ultimately arose from the client's skill and risk-taking, and not automatically from the margin itself.Justice Sandeep V. Marne was hearing a petition filed by Kotak Securities...
Income Tax Act | Mechanical Approval U/S 153D Vitiates Proceedings; Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal
The Bombay High Court has dismissed an income tax appeal filed by the Revenue, holding that an approval granted under Section 153D of the Act, which does not reflect even minimal application of mind, is vitiated in law and renders the consequential proceedings invalid. A Division Bench of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Advait M. Sethna, while deciding an appeal, answered the substantial question of law against the Revenue i.e. Whether an approval granted under Section 153D of the Income...
Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Granting Specific Performance Of Development Agreement Between BTRA & Nilkanth Enterprise
The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) upholding a 2017 arbitral award directing specific performance of a long negotiated development transaction concerning 57,000 sq. m. of land in Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan held that “there is nothing on record to show that Nilkanth was unwilling or incapable of performing its part of the bargain. This contention too does not...
Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Granting Specific Performance Of Development Agreement Between BTRA & Nilkanth Enterprise
The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) upholding a 2017 arbitral award directing specific performance of a long negotiated development transaction concerning 57,000 sq. m. of land in Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan held that “there is nothing on record to show that Nilkanth was unwilling or incapable of performing its part of the bargain. This contention too does not...
Income Tax Act | Gross Receipts Cannot Be Taxed As Income Without Deducting Expenses: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has stayed the entire income tax demand raised against a state-funded educational trust, holding that the tax authorities erred in bringing gross receipts to tax without accounting for expenditure. A Division Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar, while allowing a writ petition filed by the assessee, Godavari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Sindhi, set aside an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune, which had directed the...
GST Abolished Ad Tax, Doesn't Bar Municipal Licence Fees on Hoardings: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court recently held that the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax regime does not take away the power of municipal corporations in Maharshtra to levy licence fees on hoardings and sky-signs. The court clarified that GST abolished only advertisement tax and not regulatory charges imposed under municipal law. A division bench of Justice G S Kulkarni and Justice Advait M Sethna, made the observation while dismissing a large batch of petitions filed by outdoor advertising...
Bombay High Court Temporarily Restrains Financial Companies From Infringing 'FEDEX' Trademark
The Bombay High Court has restrained Maharashtra-based FedEx Securities Pvt. Ltd. and its group companies from using the word “FEDEX” in their corporate names, holding that the term is globally and exclusively associated with Federal Express Corporation, the US logistics major. Justice R I Chagla passed the order on December 11, allowing Federal Express Corporation's plea for interim protection of its trademark. The court found that the financial services group had no legitimate basis to adopt...
SARFAESI Sale Cannot Proceed If Sale Certificate Is Not Issued Before IBC Moratorium: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that a secured creditor cannot proceed with a SARFAESI sale once an interim moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code comes into force. It rulled that the Union Bank of India was not entitled to accept balance payments or issue a sale certificate after the personal insolvency process against the borrower had commenced. In an order passed on December 10, Justices R I Chagla and Farhan P Dubash held that “the secured creditor could not have...
Bombay High Court Sets Aside Award Ordering Sharekhan To Refund Rs 4.87 Lakh In Brokerage
The Bombay High Court has set aside an arbitral award that had directed Sharekhan Limited, a broking firm, to refund Rs 4.87 lakh in brokerage to its client Darshini Shah. The court held that the arbitral tribunal had irrationally treated the same 2007 contract between the parties as valid for permitting trades but invalid for charging brokerage and that such a conclusion was fundamentally inconsistent with Indian contract law. A single bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne held on December 9, 2025,...