The Bombay High Court has held that re-opening is not permissible as it clearly falls within the purview of a ‘change of opinion’ which is impermissible in law.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and.
Nominal Index [Citation 506 - 516]Anandraj Manikam v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 506Nikhil Ashokrao Waghmare and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 507Manik.
Nominal Index [Citation 464 - 508]Wynk Ltd. v. Tips Industries Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 464Dolby Builders Private Ltd. and Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom).
The Bombay High Court has stated that system default is the standard excuse of the department when it comes to giving refunds.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale has observed.
Nominal Index [Citation 483 - 493]Sandip Sundarrao Patil and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 483Bhushan s/o. Sangappa Chaudhari v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw.