Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH KUMAR
Megha Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ankit Kumar Singh, Son Of Anil Kumar Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH KUMAR, J.
Learned counsel for the opposite party at the outset has made objection regarding maintainability of the present C.M.P. and submitted that in view of the issue involved a first appeal is maintainable and not a C.M.P.
2. In support of his contention he has relied upon judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vimlendu Kumar Jha Vrs. Minal Bhatnagar passed in Special Leave to Appeal(C) Nos. 28174-28175/2025 dated 09.10.2025, which is quoted hereunder:
Leave granted.
Learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the respondent(s) submitted that CM(M) No.2800 of 2024 was filed prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the full bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Geetanjali Aggarwal vs. Dr.Manoj Aggarwal (2024 SCC Online Del 7220}.
On the day this CM(M) NO.2800 of 2014 was filed, there was no bar to file a Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as such a bar, if any created by the pronouncement of the Full Bench, had not yet come into existence. In the circumstances, the question of maintainability of the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner herein does not arise in the instant case.
Con
Orders under Section 12 of Guardians and Wards Act by Family Courts are appealable under Section 19 of Family Courts Act despite interlocutory label under GW Act, as FC Act overrides with wide indepe....
Appeal – Orders passed under Section 12 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 would be appealable under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984.
Orders under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act are appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, as they affect vital rights and welfare of minors.
Interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act are interlocutory and not appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.
A reference to a larger bench is only warranted in the presence of conflicting decisions, not merely to create a precedent.
Interlocutory orders under the Family Courts Act are not appealable; custody decisions must prioritize the welfare of minors by considering their perspectives.
A custody order under the Guardians and Wards Act, if a result of a full trial, is appealable and not merely interlocutory.
An order rejecting an amendment application is an interlocutory order and not appealable under Section 19 of the Family Court Act, as it does not decide substantive rights.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
