Madhya Pradesh High Court
Birla Ericsson Optical Ltd. vs Union Of India on 14 September, 2010
1.....
W.P.12348/06
14.9.2010
Shri Narendra Sharma & Shri Vikram Singh, Counsel
for the petitioner.
Shri S.Dharmadhikari, Counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that in compliance of order dated 12.8.2010 the records are available with him.
On submitting this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to inspect the records. Though the prayer is opposed by the other side but considering the fact that the on the basis of the records, this matter is to be argued, we permit the petitioner to inspect the records.
The respondents shall permit the petitioner or its counsel to inspect the records in the presence of the counsel for the respondents. The aforesaid inspection may be carried out during the course of the day.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after inspection if the petitioner requires some copies of the documents, then he may be permitted to obtain the Photostat copy.
This prayer is opposed by Shri Dharmadhikari. The aforesaid objection of Shri Dharmadhikari is just and proper. If petitioner requires some copies of the documents, petitioner is free to obtain the certified copy of the same in accordance with law but the petitioner is not entitled to get photostat copy of the documents. The petitioner may prepare a note of the record on the basis of which the petitioner may submit
2.....
W.P.12348/0614.9.2010 its contentions before this Court.
List for hearing on 19.10.2010 as prayed by the parties.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain)
JUDGE JUDGE
vj