MAT.A. (FC) No.153/2014 Page 1 of 5

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 153/2014 & CM No.20182/2014

MADHU PAMNANI & ORS

..... Appellants

Represented by:

Appellant in person

versus

NEERAJ PAMNANI

..... Respondent

Represented by:

Respondent in person

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG

HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

1.

We had heard the parties at length on August 17, 2016 and had

indicated that judgment would be pronounced today. The reason was the

desire of the Court to go through the pleadings and the voluminous record in

the appeal which spans 569 pages. We did so for the reason the parties had

argued the appeal themselves.

2.

The voluminous record is replete with applications which are verbose

and were disposed of on August 17, 2016. They are full of allegations and

counter allegations against each other. Said pleadings are irrelevant to

decide the issue which arises in the appeal.

3.

The wife is aggrieved by the impugned order dated August 07, 2014

refusing to modify the visitation rights granted to