Full Text
Translation output
f HIGH COURT OF DELHI
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015
INNl CHANDRA & ANR Appellants
Through: Mr. Nagender Deswal, Adv. with Appellant in person.
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015
INNl CHANDRA & ANR Appellants
Through: Mr. Nagender Deswal, Adv. with Appellant in person.
VERSUS
DEEPAK ANAND MASIH Respondent
Through: Respondent in person.
Through: Respondent in person.
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 104/2015
DEEPAK ANAND MASIH Appellant
Through: Appellant in person.
DEEPAK ANAND MASIH Appellant
Through: Appellant in person.
VERSUS
INNI CHANDRA Respondent
Through: Mr. Nagender Deswal, Adv. with respondent in person.
Through: Mr. Nagender Deswal, Adv. with respondent in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH
07.08.2015 Caveat No. 797/2015 in MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015
As respondent has put an appearance, caveat stands discharged.
CM No. 14283/2015 in MAT.APP.(F.C.1 104/2015 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
MAT.APP.fF.C.1100/2015 MAT.APP.(F.C.^ 104/2015 & CM No. 14282/2015
2015:DHC:11723-DB f By these two appeals, the appellants challenge the order dated 22"''
July, 2015 passed by the Principal Judge, South-East, Family Courts, Saket, New Delhi.
Appellant in MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015 is primarily aggrieved by the order dated 22"'' July, 2015 passed by the learned Principal Judge, South-
East, Family Court, Saket, New Delhi due to the fact that the Court itself heldthat it has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed under
Section 25 of the Guardians and Ward Act by the petitioners but yet exercised its jurisdiction to the extent of allowing the petitioner therein to meet his child once a week as an interim relief.
The grievance of the appellant-husband in the MAT.APP.(F.C.)
104/2015 isthat the impugned order dated 22""* July, 2015 passed by learned
Principal Judge, South-East, Family Court, Saket, NewDelhi is illegal and perverse as the said Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the
Guardianship Petition No.22/2015 preferred by the petitioner namely
Deepak Anand Masih under Section 25 ofthe Guardian and Ward Act.
During the course of the hearing of both the present appeals, both the parties have agreed that the said interim direction given by the learned
Principal Judge in para No.22 ofthe impugned order dated 22"'' July, 2015 may remain in force with little modification with regard to the timings for the meeting of the respondent namely Deepak Anand Masih with his minor child to be changed from 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. on each Saturday except second Saturday and inplace ofsecond Saturday the meeting may take place on second Thursday of the month. The respondent, Mr. Deepak Anand
Masih has also stated that he will be filing an interim application under
Section 25 of the Guardianship Act before the Patiala House Court before f the Principal Judge within a period ofthree weeks from the date ofthis order seeking interim custody and visitation rights to meet his child. The aforesaid interim arrangement shall continue till the Principal Judge, Patiala
House Court decides the interim application to be moved by the respondent
Mr. Deepak Anand Masih under Section 25 of the.Guardians and Wards
Act. We also direct that the learned Principal Judge, Patiala House Court to decide the interim application preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of appearance of the appellant-wife before the concerned
Court. We also direct the respondent Mr. Deepak Anand Masih to send an advance copy of the application to the appellant, Inni Chandra so that she appears before the Guardianship Court on the first date itself.
We make it clear that the aforesaid observation do not tantamount to any expression touching the merits of the case and the Guardianship Court will be independent to take its own view in the guardianship petition to be filedby the respondentMr. DeepakAnand Masih.
This order will be effective from next week.
The appeals stand disposed of.
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J V.P.VAISH,J'^ AUGUST 07, 2015 nk
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH
07.08.2015 Caveat No. 797/2015 in MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015
As respondent has put an appearance, caveat stands discharged.
CM No. 14283/2015 in MAT.APP.(F.C.1 104/2015 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
MAT.APP.fF.C.1100/2015 MAT.APP.(F.C.^ 104/2015 & CM No. 14282/2015
2015:DHC:11723-DB f By these two appeals, the appellants challenge the order dated 22"''
July, 2015 passed by the Principal Judge, South-East, Family Courts, Saket, New Delhi.
Appellant in MAT.APP.(F.C.) 100/2015 is primarily aggrieved by the order dated 22"'' July, 2015 passed by the learned Principal Judge, South-
East, Family Court, Saket, New Delhi due to the fact that the Court itself heldthat it has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed under
Section 25 of the Guardians and Ward Act by the petitioners but yet exercised its jurisdiction to the extent of allowing the petitioner therein to meet his child once a week as an interim relief.
The grievance of the appellant-husband in the MAT.APP.(F.C.)
104/2015 isthat the impugned order dated 22""* July, 2015 passed by learned
Principal Judge, South-East, Family Court, Saket, NewDelhi is illegal and perverse as the said Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the
Guardianship Petition No.22/2015 preferred by the petitioner namely
Deepak Anand Masih under Section 25 ofthe Guardian and Ward Act.
During the course of the hearing of both the present appeals, both the parties have agreed that the said interim direction given by the learned
Principal Judge in para No.22 ofthe impugned order dated 22"'' July, 2015 may remain in force with little modification with regard to the timings for the meeting of the respondent namely Deepak Anand Masih with his minor child to be changed from 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. on each Saturday except second Saturday and inplace ofsecond Saturday the meeting may take place on second Thursday of the month. The respondent, Mr. Deepak Anand
Masih has also stated that he will be filing an interim application under
Section 25 of the Guardianship Act before the Patiala House Court before f the Principal Judge within a period ofthree weeks from the date ofthis order seeking interim custody and visitation rights to meet his child. The aforesaid interim arrangement shall continue till the Principal Judge, Patiala
House Court decides the interim application to be moved by the respondent
Mr. Deepak Anand Masih under Section 25 of the.Guardians and Wards
Act. We also direct that the learned Principal Judge, Patiala House Court to decide the interim application preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of appearance of the appellant-wife before the concerned
Court. We also direct the respondent Mr. Deepak Anand Masih to send an advance copy of the application to the appellant, Inni Chandra so that she appears before the Guardianship Court on the first date itself.
We make it clear that the aforesaid observation do not tantamount to any expression touching the merits of the case and the Guardianship Court will be independent to take its own view in the guardianship petition to be filedby the respondentMr. DeepakAnand Masih.
This order will be effective from next week.
The appeals stand disposed of.
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J V.P.VAISH,J'^ AUGUST 07, 2015 nk
JUDGMENT