Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments
  • Acts

Bombay High Court Case Commentaries

Establishing Compensation Claims Under Void Mortgages: Insights from Javerbhai Jorabhai v. Gordhan Narsi

Establishing Compensation Claims Under Void Mortgages: Insights from Javerbhai Jorabhai v. Gordhan Narsi

Date: Dec 23, 1914
Establishing Compensation Claims Under Void Mortgages: Insights from Javerbhai Jorabhai v. Gordhan Narsi Introduction The case of Javerbhai Jorabhai v. Gordhan Narsi adjudicated by the Bombay High...
Limitation of Bandhu Succession Rights in Mitakshara Hindu Law: Ramchandra Martand Waikar v. Vinayak Venkatesh Kothekar (1914)

Limitation of Bandhu Succession Rights in Mitakshara Hindu Law: Ramchandra Martand Waikar v. Vinayak Venkatesh Kothekar (1914)

Date: Jun 30, 1914
Limitation of Bandhu Succession Rights in Mitakshara Hindu Law Ramchandra Martand Waikar v. Vinayak Venkatesh Kothekar (Bombay High Court, 1914) Introduction The case of Ramchandra Martand Waikar v....
Annie Besant v. G. Narayaniah: Revocation of Guardianship and Judicial Jurisdiction

Annie Besant v. G. Narayaniah: Revocation of Guardianship and Judicial Jurisdiction

Date: May 26, 1914
Annie Besant v. G. Narayaniah: Revocation of Guardianship and Judicial Jurisdiction Introduction The case of Annie Besant v. G. Narayaniah was adjudicated by the Bombay High Court on May 25, 1914....
Establishing Boundaries of Good Faith in Criminal Defamation: Channing Arnold v. The Emperor

Establishing Boundaries of Good Faith in Criminal Defamation: Channing Arnold v. The Emperor

Date: Apr 8, 1914
Establishing Boundaries of Good Faith in Criminal Defamation: Channing Arnold v. The Emperor Introduction Channing Arnold v. The Emperor is a landmark case decided by the Bombay High Court on April...
Liability of Railway Companies in Cargo Fires: Insights from Hirji Khetsey & Co. v. B.B. & C.I. Ry. Co.

Liability of Railway Companies in Cargo Fires: Insights from Hirji Khetsey & Co. v. B.B. & C.I. Ry. Co.

Date: Mar 14, 1914
Liability of Railway Companies in Cargo Fires: Insights from Hirji Khetsey & Co. v. B.B. & C.I. Ry. Co. Introduction The case of Hirji Khetsey & Co. v. B.B. & C.I. Ry. Co., adjudicated by the Bombay...
Rasul Karim v. Pirbhai Amirbhai: Clarifying the Limits on Mandatory Injunctions in Indian Courts

Rasul Karim v. Pirbhai Amirbhai: Clarifying the Limits on Mandatory Injunctions in Indian Courts

Date: Jan 17, 1914
Rasul Karim v. Pirbhai Amirbhai: Clarifying the Limits on Mandatory Injunctions in Indian Courts Introduction The case of Rasul Karim v. Pirbhai Amirbhai was adjudicated by the Bombay High Court on...
Bombay High Court Limits Independent Advice Requirement in Deeds of Gift by Pardanashin Wives — Kali Bakhsh Singh v. Ram Gopal Singh

Bombay High Court Limits Independent Advice Requirement in Deeds of Gift by Pardanashin Wives — Kali Bakhsh Singh v. Ram Gopal Singh

Date: Nov 28, 1913
Bombay High Court Limits Independent Advice Requirement in Deeds of Gift by Pardanashin Wives — Kali Bakhsh Singh v. Ram Gopal Singh Introduction The case of Kali Bakhsh Singh v. Ram Gopal Singh...
Kalyanchand Lalchand v. Sitabai Dhanasa: Establishing Res Judicata in Probate Proceedings

Kalyanchand Lalchand v. Sitabai Dhanasa: Establishing Res Judicata in Probate Proceedings

Date: Nov 6, 1913
Kalyanchand Lalchand v. Sitabai Dhanasa: Establishing Res Judicata in Probate Proceedings Introduction Kalyanchand Lalchand v. Sitabai Dhanasa is a landmark judgment delivered by the Bombay High...
Forfeiture Clauses in Insurance Policies: Insights from Baroda Spinning And Weaving Co. Ltd. v. Satyanarayan Marine And Fire Insurance Co. Ltd.

Forfeiture Clauses in Insurance Policies: Insights from Baroda Spinning And Weaving Co. Ltd. v. Satyanarayan Marine And Fire Insurance Co. Ltd.

Date: Aug 20, 1913
Forfeiture Clauses in Insurance Policies: Insights from Baroda Spinning And Weaving Co. Ltd. v. Satyanarayan Marine And Fire Insurance Co. Ltd. Introduction The case of Baroda Spinning And Weaving...
Vasudeo Atmaram Joshi v. Eknath Balkrishna Thite: Interpretation of Limitation Act Articles 142 and 144 in Property Possession Disputes

Vasudeo Atmaram Joshi v. Eknath Balkrishna Thite: Interpretation of Limitation Act Articles 142 and 144 in Property Possession Disputes

Date: Aug 24, 1910
Vasudeo Atmaram Joshi v. Eknath Balkrishna Thite: Interpretation of Limitation Act Articles 142 and 144 in Property Possession Disputes Introduction The case of Vasudeo Atmaram Joshi v. Eknath...
Nandlal Thakersey v. The Bank Of Bombay: Redefining Valid Pledges and Conversion in Contract Law

Nandlal Thakersey v. The Bank Of Bombay: Redefining Valid Pledges and Conversion in Contract Law

Date: Jan 18, 1910
Nandlal Thakersey v. The Bank Of Bombay: Redefining Valid Pledges and Conversion in Contract Law Introduction The case of Nandlal Thakersey v. The Bank Of Bombay adjudicated by the Bombay High Court...
Government of Bombay v. Esufali Salebhai: Expanding the Scope of the Land Acquisition Act

Government of Bombay v. Esufali Salebhai: Expanding the Scope of the Land Acquisition Act

Date: Nov 2, 1909
Government of Bombay v. Esufali Salebhai: Expanding the Scope of the Land Acquisition Act Introduction The case of The Government Of Bombay v. Esufali Salebhai adjudicated by the Bombay High Court on...
Purushottam Hargovandas v. Rajbai: Reinforcing Execution Proceedings Amid Estate Management

Purushottam Hargovandas v. Rajbai: Reinforcing Execution Proceedings Amid Estate Management

Date: Sep 2, 1909
Purushottam Hargovandas v. Rajbai: Reinforcing Execution Proceedings Amid Estate Management Introduction Purushottam Hargovandas v. Rajbai is a landmark judgment delivered by the Bombay High Court on...
Kisandas Rupchand v. Rachappa Vithoba Shilwant: Principles Governing Amendment of Pleadings

Kisandas Rupchand v. Rachappa Vithoba Shilwant: Principles Governing Amendment of Pleadings

Date: Jul 3, 1909
Kisandas Rupchand v. Rachappa Vithoba Shilwant: Principles Governing Amendment of Pleadings Introduction Kisandas Rupchand filed a suit in the Bombay High Court on March 28, 1905, seeking dissolution...
Res Judicata and Specific Performance in Ahmedbhoy v. Sir Dinshaw M. Petit: A Comprehensive Commentary

Res Judicata and Specific Performance in Ahmedbhoy v. Sir Dinshaw M. Petit: A Comprehensive Commentary

Date: Jun 15, 1909
Res Judicata and Specific Performance in Ahmedbhoy v. Sir Dinshaw M. Petit: A Comprehensive Commentary Introduction In the landmark case of Ahmedbhoy Habibbhoy v. Sir Dinshaw M. Petit And Others,...
Liability of Minor Coparceners in Joint Hindu Family Firms: Insights from Raghunathji Tarachand A Firm v. Bank Of Bombay

Liability of Minor Coparceners in Joint Hindu Family Firms: Insights from Raghunathji Tarachand A Firm v. Bank Of Bombay

Date: Jan 23, 1909
Liability of Minor Coparceners in Joint Hindu Family Firms: Insights from Raghunathji Tarachand A Firm v. Bank Of Bombay Introduction The case of Raghunathji Tarachand A Firm v. Bank Of Bombay...
Land Valuation Principles in Land Acquisition: Insights from Government of Bombay v. Cama (1908)

Land Valuation Principles in Land Acquisition: Insights from Government of Bombay v. Cama (1908)

Date: Aug 21, 1908
Land Valuation Principles in Land Acquisition: Insights from Government of Bombay v. Merwanji Muncherji Cama (1908) Introduction The case of Government of Bombay v. Merwanji Muncherji Cama, decided...
Principles of Land Valuation in Acquisition: Government of Bombay v. Karim Tar Mahomed (1908)

Principles of Land Valuation in Acquisition: Government of Bombay v. Karim Tar Mahomed (1908)

Date: Jun 19, 1908
Principles of Land Valuation in Acquisition: Government of Bombay v. Karim Tar Mahomed (1908) Introduction Government of Bombay v. Karim Tar Mahomed is a landmark judgment delivered by the Bombay...
Distinguishing Hindu Joint Family Property from English Joint Property: Karsandas Dharamsey v. Gangabai (1908)

Distinguishing Hindu Joint Family Property from English Joint Property: Karsandas Dharamsey v. Gangabai (1908)

Date: Jan 24, 1908
Distinguishing Hindu Joint Family Property from English Joint Property: Karsandas Dharamsey v. Gangabai (1908) Introduction Karsandas Dharamsey v. Gangabai is a seminal judgment delivered by the...
Preservation of Widow's Inheritance Rights in Gangu v. Chandrabhagabai

Preservation of Widow's Inheritance Rights in Gangu v. Chandrabhagabai

Date: Dec 12, 1907
Preservation of Widow's Inheritance Rights in Gangu v. Chandrabhagabai Introduction The case of Gangu v. Chandrabhagabai, adjudicated by the Bombay High Court on December 11, 1907, addresses pivotal...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert