Overview
- Justice Milind M. Sathaye found the respondent’s written submissions cited a non-existent case, “Jyoti w/o Dinesh Tulsiani v. Elegant Associates,” after court staff could not locate it anywhere.
- The papers bore telltale AI traits such as repetitive phrasing, bullet marks and green tick boxes, leading the court to conclude they were generated using a tool like ChatGPT.
- The respondent was ordered to deposit ₹50,000 with the High Court Employees Medical Fund within two weeks and file proof in the registry.
- On the tenancy dispute’s merits, the court set aside the revisional order under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act and directed the respondent to vacate the Oshiwara flat.
- The judge condemned the practice of dumping unverified or irrelevant material as a waste of judicial time and warned that advocates may face referral to the Bar Council for such conduct.