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

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2190

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Suman – Appellant
Versus
Bhikam Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Hari Krishana Sharma.
For the Respondent: Ms. Shashi Bala Sharma.

JUDGMENT :

(Praveer Bhatnagar, J.)

This appeal is preferred against the order dated 03.02.2021 passed by the Family Court, Dholpur (hereinafter referred to as 'Family Court' for short) whereby, the application of the respondent paternal grandfather filed under sections 6 and 25 of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1980 (hereinafter called 'the Act' for short) was allowed and, the Court directed the appellant mother to hand over the custody of Master X to the respondent and further authorised the limited visiting rights to the appellant.

2. Admittedly, minor X is the appellant's son and paternal grandson of the respondent (father-in-law of the appellant).

3. The operative part of the order reads as follows:-

^^16½ mijksDr laiw.kZ foospu ds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ Hkhde flag dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g izkFkZuk i=] vo;Ld ckyd fd'ku iq= Lo-usehpan dh vfHkj{kk ds lanHkZ esa fuEu fn'kk&funsZ'kksa ds lkFk Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS %&

1-izkFkhZ Hkhde flag dks vius iq= usehpan o lqeu ds uqRQs ls mRiUu larku ukckfyx fd'ku iq= Lo-usehpan dh mfpr ns[kHkky] dY;k.k ,oa ykyu&ikyu gsrq fof/kd laj{kd fu;qDr fd;k tkdj vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd izkFkhZ vius ikS= fd’ku dh f'k{kk] [kku&iku] LokLF; ,oa dY;k.k dk iwjk /;ku j[ksxk

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