Ritu Johari v. Vineet Taneja

1. It is noticed that one of us, Manoj Jain, J. had earlier dealt with the proceedings between the parties in the year 2019, when he was the Principal Judge, Family Court. Parties confirm that none of the orders passed by him are under challenge in these proceedings or have ever been challenged and that they have no objection to him hearing the matter.

2. Appellant impugns order dated 05.04.2023, whereby the Family Court has granted visitation rights to the respondent to meet the minor child on the 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month in the Children Room, Family Court, Saket from 3 PM to 5 PM under observation of the Counsellor besides granting visitation on birthdays of the minor child for 2 hours from 3 PM to 5 PM under similar supervision.

3. Appellant submits that the Family Court has erred in not appreciating that there were two reports of the Child Councillor which were placed before the Division Bench of this Court in LPA 603/2022 which had a bearing on claim of the respondent for visitation and considering which, the Division Bench had suspended all visitations.

4. Appellant submits that the suspension of visitation was challenged by the respondent before the Supreme Court in SLP(C) 3667/2023 and after considering the reports of the Councillor, the special leave petition was dismissed on 28.03.2023.

5. Appellant further submits that the reports, which were placed before the Division Bench as well as the Supreme Court could not be placed before the Family Court at the time of hearing of the petition because the High Court had placed an embargo on the parties from disclosing the reports except with the leave of the Court. She submits that subsequently the Division Bench has by order dated 13.04.2023, permitted the parties to produce the reports before appropriate forum. She submits that since the reports were neither placed before the Family Court nor considered by the Family Court, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and remitted for fresh consideration.

6. Issue notice. Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

7. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal today.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent, under instructions from the respondent, submits that he has no objection to the matter been remitted to the Family Court for fresh consideration subject, however, to his right to impugn the reports on merits.

9. In view of the above, with consent of the parties, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Family Court for fresh consideration on the entire issue.

10. Appellant shall file the reports before the Family Court in a sealed cover and it would be open to the respondent to file his objections to the same and for the parties to substantiate their respective stands before the Family Court in accordance with law. Thereafter the Family Court shall reconsider the matter and pass a fresh order keeping in view the reports of the councillor, objections of the respondent and the totality of the facts and circumstances.

11. It is clarified that we have neither considered nor commented upon the merits of the contentions of either parties or merits of the reports or otherwise. It would be open to the Family Court to consider the same in accordance with law.

12. Keeping in view the fact that the Division Bench by order dated 03.02.2023 had suspended the rights of visitation, which order was upheld by the Supreme Court by its order dated 28.03.2022, we clarify that the visitation shall remain suspended till a fresh final order is passed by the Family Court.

13. Keeping in view the fact that the petition has been pending for a long time and the child is nearly 14 years of age, the Family Court is directed to expedite the proceedings and endeavour to conclude the same within a period of 6 months from the next date fixed before the Family Court.

14. Parties shall appear before the Family Court for directions on 03rd June, 2023.

15. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.