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

G. SATAPATHY
Manjusha Singhania – Appellant
Versus
Nimish Singhania – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B. Bhuyan, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. S. Sahoo, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. L.K. Moharana, Advocate

JUDGMENT

G. Satapathy, J.—The Petitioner-wife has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India by praying to quash the order dated 23.11.2019 passed under Annexure-8 by which the learned Senior Civil Judge, Talcher has allowed the I.A. No.123 of 2017 arising out of MAT No.19 of 2016 granting visitation right to the Opposite Party-father.

2. By the impugned order, the learned trial court has observed inter-alia the following:-

“The father is entitled to visitation right to his son once in a fortnight preferably on a holiday as per the date, time, place fixed by the respondent-O.P. under intimation to this Court. So also the father shall have assessed to the child on his birth day, on the special festive occasion also.”

3. Heard, Mr. Bibekananda Bhuyan, learned Senior counsel who is assisted by Ms. Sujata Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Lalit Kumar Moharana, learned counsel for the OP in the matter and perused the record.

4. The relationship between the Parties is never in dispute, but the Petitioner-wife challenges the impugned order granting visitation right of the son to the father-cum-OP on the

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