Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 1565
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Vikas Mahajan, JJ.
Yudhvir Chhikara – Appellant
Versus
Priyanka – Respondent
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 105 of 2021
Decided On : 11-04-2023
Ms. Aishwarya Makhija, Advocate (through VC) with appellant in person, for the Appellant.
Ms. Deepika V. Marwaha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Tanwar, Ms. Shreya Jain and Ms. Raunika Johar, Advocates, for the Respondent.
The pendency of a contempt petition should not hinder the family court's consideration and disposal of an application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
Headnote:
Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Section 12 - Application Deferred - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, alleging breach of orders granting online visitations by the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the appeal, directing the family court to consider the appellant's application under Section 12 of the Act in accordance with the law, emphasizing that the pendency of the contempt petition should not hinder the family court's decision unless there is a stay of the proceedings by the High Court.
Issues: Application under Section 12 of the Act, pendency of contempt petition, family court's consideration of the application.
Ratio Decidendi: The family court should consider the application and dispose of it in accordance with the law without being influenced by any interim arrangement, and should sympathetically consider an application for early hearing and expedite the proceedings.
Final Decision: The family court is directed to consider the appellant's application under Section 12 of the Act in accordance with the law, without being influenced by the pendency of the contempt petition, and to expedite the proceedings upon an application for early hearing.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Appellant is aggrieved by order dated 30.09.2021 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been deferred to await the outcome of CONT. CAS. (C) No. 2012/2021.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the contempt petition was filed on the ground that the respondent had committed a breach of the orders granting online visitations to the appellant.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that she has no objection in case the application is taken up and decided by the family court on merits.
4. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of directing the family court to consider the application filed by the appellant under Section 12 of the Act in accordance with law.
5. Needless to state that the pendency of the contempt petition which has been initiated by the appellant cannot come in the way of the family court in disposing of the application on merits unless there is a stay of the proceedings by the High Court where the proceedings of contempt are pending.
6. The family court shall consider the application and dispose of the same in accordance with law without being influenced by any interim arrangement that was arrived at in these proceedings.
7. On an application being filed for early hearing, the Family Court shall sympathetically consider the same and expedite the proceedings.
8. Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
