Advocate Manasi Joshi & Associates

07/06/2026

Title: Husband’s Failure To Inquire About Wife’s Well-Being Amounts To 'Neglect', Physical Abuse Justifies Separate Residence: Bombay High Court

Husband’s Failure To Inquire About Wife’s Well-Being Amounts To 'Neglect', Physical Abuse Justifies Separate Residence: Bombay High Court

18/04/2026

17/04/2026

https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/bombay-high-court/family-courts-cannot-casually-pass-orders-directing-spouse-to-undergo-medical-exam-to-ascertain-mental-health-bombay-high-court-530574

The Bombay High Court has held that though a Family Court possesses sufficient powers to refer a spouse for medical examination to ascertain if s/he suffers from a mental disorder, it cannot...

14/04/2026

https://www.livelaw.in/amp/supreme-court/spouse-cannot-withdraw-consent-for-mutual-divorce-after-agreeing-for-it-in-settlement-of-claims-supreme-court-530194

"Any deviation from the terms of the settlement arrived in mediation and later confirmed by the Court should be dealt with strictly," the Court said.

21/03/2026

https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/consumer-forum-cannot-decide-banking-disputes-involving-fraud-forgery-supreme-court

The Supreme Court of India has held that consumer forum cannot adjudicate disputes involving allegations of fraud and forgery in banking transactions, particula

20/01/2026

SC: Appellants held entitled to damages and their complaint held not barred by limitation - Consumer Protection Act (1986), Ss.21, 24A - Limitation Act (1963), S.22 - Maharashtra ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act (1963), Ss.6, 12

_Consumer complaint - Limitation - Continuing cause of action - Appellant, Society of Flat owners - Members of appellant booked flats in 1993 and granted possession in 1997 - Respondent, promoter failed to obtain occupation certificate from municipal authorities, due to which society members had to pay higher taxes and higher water charges - Complaint before State Commission (SCDRC) filed in 1998 - SCDRC directed respondent to obtain occupancy certificate in three months - In 2014, National Commission also directed respondent to obtain certificate within four months - Respondent however failed to prove the same - Such continuous failure is breach of obligations imposed on respondent under agreement and amounts to continuing wrong - Hence, appellants held entitled to damages and their complaint held not barred by limitation._

_Case:_

Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction Pvt. Ltd.

_Citation:_
2022(2) ALL MR 1 (S.C.)

13/01/2026

Hon’ble permanent Lok Adalat penalised a builder for not providing a Completion Certificate (CC) even after 20 years.❗️❗️❗️

⁠The builder must provide the CC and OC within 3 months.📃📃📃
•⁠ ⁠A compensation of ₹2 Lakh was awarded to the complainants for mental and physical harassment.💵💵💵
•⁠ ⁠6% interest is to be paid on the compensation amount from the date of the complaint.⚖️⚖️

This serves as a massive reminder: You have rights as a buyer! Don't let builders ignore their legal obligation

04/01/2026

Suspicious Or Unusual Circumstances In A Will Must Be Examined To Their Logical Conclusion; Propounder To Dispel Such Suspicion: Bombay High Court

The High Court reiterated that even where a Will is formally proved, the testamentary court is duty-bound to examine any suspicious or unusual circumstances peculiar to the facts of the case, and the...

02/01/2026

Source: Free Press Journal

The Bombay High Court ruled that once a buyer uses supplied goods, it amounts to deemed acceptance under the Sale of Goods Act, barring later rejection on defect claims and limiting remedies to damages for breach of warranty.