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

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SHAKDHER
Niteen Yeola – Appellant
Versus
Vartika Katiyar – Respondent


Table of Content
1. violation of court order regarding child access. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arrangement for videoconferencing meeting. (Para 4)
3. final disposal of contempt petition. (Para 5 , 7)
4. withdrawal of averments & assertions in petition. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT

[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]

Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)--This contempt petition has been filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, principally, on the ground that the direction contained in the order dated 14.09.2020, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, in HMA No. 252/2020, has been violated.

1.1. The allegation concerning violation of the order dated 14.09.2020 by the respondent arises out of a matrimonial dispute erupting between the parties. Both the parties have joined the present proceedings along with their respective counsels via video-conferencing mechanism.

2. The child involved, I am told, is Ayan, who is seven years old.

2.1. The direction contained in the order dated 14.09.2020 requires the wife i.e. the respondent herein, to grant access to Ayan, for about 15 to 20 minutes, on second, and fourth Sunday

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