ILA VIPIN PANDYA versus SMITA AMBALAL PATEL & ANR.

ILA VIPIN PANDYA versus SMITA AMBALAL PATEL & ANR.

Respondent No.1, being a party to the suit from which the miscellaneous application emanated and having shown tangible interest, is entitled to a certified copy of the miscellaneous application under Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules. Grant of certified copies does not confer a right to participate in perjury proceedings; potential misuse must be addressed by the lower court if complaint is made.

Parties
Appellant: Ila Vipin Pandya; Respondent No.1: Smita Ambalal Patel; Respondent No.2: Fereshte Sethna
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Division Bench
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Certified Copies, Searches of Court Records, Bombay High Court (original Side) Rules, Perjury Allegations, Party Status in Proceedings
Civil Procedure Testamentary Law Certified Copies Searches of Court Records Bombay High Court (original Side) Rules Perjury Allegations Party Status in Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ila Vipin Pandya

Appellant

Smita Ambalal Patel

Respondent No.1

Fereshte Sethna

Respondent No.2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Division Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement of a party to receive certified copies of a miscellaneous application arising from a suit
  2. 2 Distinction between party and non-party rights regarding court record access under Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules
  3. 3 Potential for misuse of certified copies in related proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Respondent No.1, being a party to the suit from which the miscellaneous application emanated and having shown tangible interest, is entitled to a certified copy of the miscellaneous application under Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules. Grant of certified copies does not confer a right to participate in perjury proceedings; potential misuse must be addressed by the lower court if complaint is made.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Respondent No.1 is entitled to certified copy of Miscellaneous Application No.1 of 2004.
  • Costs of Rs.10,000/- imposed on the appellant.