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

RAVI NATH TILHARI, NYAPATHY VIJAY
Shaik Aslam Latheef – Appellant
Versus
Madanapalli Shafia Mariyam – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ayesha Azma S., Advocate

ORDER

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.—Heard Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Ayesha Azma S, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The petitioner/appellant is the father of the minor ward, aged about 7 years, namely, Ayaan Latheef, and the respondent is the mother of the minor.

3. The petitioner/appellant herein shall be referred as ‘father’ and the respondent as ‘mother’ of the minor ward, hereinafter.

4. G.W.O.P.No.03 of 2020 was filed by the father under Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act 1890 to declare the petitioner as Guardian to the minor ward being natural guardian (father) and for other reliefs. After contest by the respondent (mother), the petition was dismissed by the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram on 15.09.2023, recording that there were no sufficient and cogent reason to give the custody of the minor ward to the father.

5. Challenging the Order dated 15.09.2023, CMA No.453 of 2023 has been filed.

6. The petitioner has filed I.A.No.1 of 2023 for direction to grant visiting rights to the petitioner-father to see the minor ward Ayaan Latheef at the house of the respondent or any other place mutually agreed or decide

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