Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ARINDAM SINHA, SATYA VEER SINGH
Ishita Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Gopal Krishan Mittal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Sinha, J.
1. Appellant is mother of the boy, who has just completed 5 years of age. Respondent is the father, in whose favour impugned judgment/order dated 20th February, 2025 has been made by the Family Court. English translation of operative direction in impugned judgment/order is reproduced below.
"Therefore, on the above grounds, the applicant's application is accepted. The respondent is directed to ensure that the applicant meets the minor child Saaransh every month on the third Saturday in the premises of the District Legal Services Authority between 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM."
On query we have ascertained from the Bar, main divorce proceeding is still pending before the Family Court.
2. Mr. Yash Garg, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant. Mr. Jai Raj, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent and raises preliminary objection on maintainability of the appeal. He submits, impugned judgment/order is interim in nature. There is no right to appeal provided therefrom under section 19 in Family Courts Act, 1984. He relies on view taken by a Division Bench of this Court on judgment dated 25th January, 2011 in First Appeal no. 495 of 2010 ( Isma Alam vs. Sri
Interim custody orders are not appealable under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, as they are considered interlocutory and do not reflect a final judgment.
Family Court's interlocutory orders regarding visitation are not appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, especially when subsequent events alter the initial conditions significantly.
The court clarified that an order granting visitation rights is an intermediary order, thus appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
The court ruled that appeals under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act are not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not affect substantial rights.
The court established that appeals against interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act are maintainable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, emphasizing the need for s....
Appeal under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, would lie against order passed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act for grant of interim maintenance.
Interlocutory orders under the Family Courts Act are not appealable; custody decisions must prioritize the welfare of minors by considering their perspectives.
Granting interim maintenance to daughter of appellant-wife and rejection of all other applications – dismissal of husband’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights whereby wife’s rights do not ne....
A custody order under the Guardians and Wards Act, if a result of a full trial, is appealable and not merely interlocutory.
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
