JOLINA ANILBHAI PATEL Vs. PRATIK DHIRAJ CHAMPANERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Y.H. Motiramani, the learned advocate appearing for the writ-applicant and Mr. Hardik H. Dave, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent.

(2.) By way of present application, the writ- applicant is aggrieved by the order impugned passed below Exh.52 dtd. 28/9/2021 passed in Hindu Marriage Petition No.44 of 2017 by the Court of 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Valsad.

(3.) Mr. Y.H. Motiramani, the learned advocate appearing for the writ-applicant submitted that the application below Exh.52 filed in Hindu Marriage Petition No.44 of 2017 is duly produced on record at Annexure-A and the certified copy of the impugned order dtd. 28/9/2021 is duly produced on record at Annexure-B. It is the case of the writ-applicant that the documents which produced before the Court below vide Exh.52 are for the purpose of exhibiting the said documents. The Court below rejected the said application on the ground that the writ applicant failed to place on record as to how the said photographs, which the writ-applicant is seeking to exhibit and the complaint filed before the Valsad Mahila Police Station on 13/7/2017 are in the custody of the writ applicant and for the said reason in absence of any proof, the Court below refused to exhibit the said documents as prayed for by the writ- applicant herein. Being aggrieved by the same, the writ applicant approached this Court seeking the reliefs as prayed for.