ORAL JUDGMENT

[1.0] Both these petitions arise out of the common judgment and order passed by the Judge, Family Court No.5, Ahmedabad dated 16.02.2022 below Exhs.5 and 22 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.83 of 2021, and therefore, they are proposed to be disposed of by this common order.

[2.0] Special Civil Application No.5611 of 2022 is filed by Devshri, daughter of Hemantkumar Shastri, wife of Nilkanth Trivedi, who preferred application, Exh.22 in the aforesaid Civil Miscellaneous Application filed before the Family Court raising preliminary issue to dismiss the suit as also praying restoring custody of daughter ‘Dhanashri’ to her. Since her application, Exh.22, is rejected by the impugned common judgment and order, she has preferred the aforesaid Special Civil Application.

[2.1] Special Civil Application No.8548 of 2022 is filed by Nilkanth Vikram Trivedi, who has preferred the aforesaid Civil Miscellaneous Application before the Family Court, seeking declaration to the effect that he being the father of the minor daughter, ‘Dhanashri’, he is entitled to retain the custody of her and no other person including the respondent therein has any right to interfere with the said custody as also further declaration is sought for that no one should have the visitation rights and he seeks permanent injunction in respect thereof against the respondent therein, who is the wife of the petitioner of the said Special Civil Application. Alongwith the aforesaid Civil Miscellaneous Application, an application, Exh.5 came to be filed by the petitioner claiming temporary injunction restraining the opponent therein or any other person either to take away the custody or interfere with the custody of the minor child, which came to be allowed by the impugned judgment and order injuncting opponent wife, agent or any other person to take away or interfere with the custody of child. However, visitation right to meet minor child ‘Dhanshri’ on every Saturday of each calender month from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. was given. Opponent wife was directed to pick up the minor at 10:00 a.m. from the residence of the applicant and drop her at

5:00 p.m..

[3.0] For the sake of brevity and convenience in this order, the parties would be referred to hereinafter as husband and wife.

[4.0] It is the case of the husband by way of Civil Miscellaneous Application that he came in contact with the wife through ‘shaadi.com’ initially in the year 2010 and after having preliminary contact they thought of getting married but because of differences in their thoughts at the relevant time the said idea was dropped. However, as narrated in the application filed before the Family Court, they continued to talk, may be occasionally, over the mobile phone. As asserted further, the wife insisted for marriage and since the husband was refusing to marry her, she wanted to marry someone else. The husband had permitted her to marry the person of her choice, and therefore ultimately the wife married a person of the choice of her family on 20.05.2013. However, within a short span, she returned back to her parental home and in the year 2014 she took divorce from her earlier husband. It is asserted in the application that an application for divorce was filed and judgment was pronounced thereon, which is produced alongwith the Civil Miscellaneous Application with a separate list. It is further asserted in the application that the said marriage was performed only with an intention showing him off.

[4.1] Thereafter it is coming out from the application that the wife by executing writing, on a stamp paper as also simple paper, threatened not only her parents but her brother also by defamatory contents therein. It is further asserted that on 18.11.2016 and 19.11.2016, the wife filed an application against her father for the purpose of maintenance and alleged domestic violence against her parents and brother and filed criminal case also. The said case is claimed to be ended in compromise on 11.01.20