S.PALANIVELU
Nathiya Faru – Appellant
Versus
Rojan Roux – Respondent
The petitioner is mother of one Roux Pauline who is wife of the respondent. Both of them have got three children. Their marriage was solemnized on 24.04.2000. After the marriage, both the spouses moved to France for eking out the likelihood. All the three children were born in France and their names have been entered in the Passport of the respondent and without the help and assistance of the respondent, the children could not travel out of France.
2. Due to certain misunderstandings, the respondent filed M.O.P.No.6 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court, Pondicherry for dissolution of marriage and the same is pending. Since the children are in France, their mother has necessarily to be in France itself. She could not come over to Pondicherry for every hearing of the case and hence her mother has come forward with a petition for permission to represent on behalf of her daughter Roux Pauline as Power Agent and to defend the case.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, he has stated inter alia that there is no necessity for grant of permission to the petitioner to defend her daughter, since she is able to come over to Pondicherry to defend the case.
4. After
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.