SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 1684

KURIAN JOSEPH, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
Amit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Sonila – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arvind Kumar, AOR.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amol B. Karande, AOR, Mr. Rajasaheb Patil, Adv.

ORDER :

Issue notice.

2. Mr. Amol B. Karande, Adv. who appears on caveat accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

3. Leave granted.

4. In the application for divorce by mutual consent, it is agreed between the parties regarding custody of children as follows:

    “That, petitioner No. 1 and 2 both are agree to custody of both the children’s residing with petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 1 will provide education, medicines and marriage of Aarokya Kumar s/o Amit Kumar. Petitioner No. 2 will provide education, medicines and medicines of Riya Kumar d/o Amit Kumar.”

5. It appears that the High Court has missed this crucial aspect while passing an order granting custody of the children to the respondent herein. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the impugned order is on account of subsequent developments. We hardly see any such reasoning or discussion on subsequent development in the impugned order, We are, therefore, of the view that the matter requires fresh consideration by the High Court, taking into account also the Terms of the Settlement of divorce by mutual consent. We, therefore, set-aside the judgment passed by the High Court and remit the matter to the High Court for fr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top