Back
2020 Supreme(Raj) 189
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Indrajit Mahanty, CJ. and Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Ramjiram Yadav - Appellant
Versus
Anil Yadav - Respondent
Special Appeal Writ; No 262 of 2019
Decided On : 04-01-2020
Rakesh Arora, Advocate, Naveen Sharma, Advocate, Ak Dave, Advocate
The court upheld the visitation rights of the respondent father and emphasized the expeditious decision on the main application of guardianship.
Headnote:
Guardian and Wards Act - Visitation Rights - The court dismissed the appeal and modified the visitation order, directing the respondent father to meet the children at Jodhpur as stipulated by the lower court.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent father filed for custody of his children under Sections 7 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, as the custody was with the maternal grandparents.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal and modified the visitation order, directing the respondent father to meet the children at Jodhpur as stipulated by the lower court, while also instructing the lower court to decide the main application of guardianship expeditiously.
Issues: The contest was regarding the visitation rights granted to the respondent father by the lower court, while the custody remained with the maternal grandparents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found no interference necessary in the appeal, but modified the visitation order based on the assurance given by the respondent father to meet the children at Jodhpur as stipulated by the lower court.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the lower court was directed to decide the main application of guardianship expeditiously.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The respondent father filed an application under Sections 7 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act before the learned Judge, Family Court No.1, Jodhpur for custody of his son Sarthak and daughter Tunisha @ Smridhi. The respondent's wife Smt.Shitlesh Yadav had expired and though the allegation for the offence under Section 304B IPC was on the respondent husband but he has been acquitted by a competent Court on 13.12.2010.
3. The contest in the present matter is regarding the visitation rights granted to the respondent father by the learned Court below whereas the custody is with the maternal grand parents.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has pointed out that the visitation of the children at Udaipur would lead to disturbance as they are staying at Jodhpur, particularly for 5 hours on every alternate week.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent father fairly submits that the respondent will come and meet the children at Jodhpur for the duration given by the learned Court below.
6. In view of the above, at this stage, no interference is called for in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed while modifying the order passed by the learned Court below dated 1.2.2019 on the assurance given by the respondent father that he will meet his children at Jodhpur on the requisite time and duration already stipulated by the learned Court below. However, the learned Court below is directed to decide the main application of guardianship, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. All pending applications also stand dismissed.
