SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Bhupendra Singh vs Smt. Lakshmi Sharma on 20 April, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
RP-667-2018
(BHUPENDRA SINGH Vs SMT. LAKSHMI SHARMA)

Gwalior, Dated : 20-04-2018
Shri Pawan Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Petitioner has filed this review petition seeking review of
the order dated 21-03-2018 passed in writ petition
No.2886/2017 on the ground that present petitioner who is

sh
father of minor is stationed at Delhi, therefore there is lot of

e
inconvenience to meet his son at Indore. It is also

ad
submitted that parents of the present petitioner are aged and
Pr
they are not in a position to move at Indore. Therefore,
a
mother of child be asked to facilitate such meeting at
hy

Morena.

ad

In this regard, attention of this Court has been drawn to
M

the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Roxann Sharma Vs. Arun Sharma reported as (2015) 8
of

SCC 318 wherein in para 9 it has been held that section 26 of
rt

the Guardian and Wards Act casts an omnibus embargo even
ou

on a guardian of a person appointed or declared by the Court
C

from removing the ward from the limits of its jurisdiction.
h

Similarly note was taken in relation to removal of the ward by
ig

the father without notifying or taking permission of Civil
H

Judge. However, in the present case facts are different when
this Court had allowed the writ petition at that time child of
petitioner was already at Indore and this Court had permitted
the petitioner along with his father and mother to meet his
child at 11 am at every working Saturday at Family Court,
Indore. Therefore, the ratio laid down in the case of Roxann
Sharma is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the
case. So far as connectivity and distance is concerned when
this order was passed at that time also petitioner was at Delhi
and at that time, no objection was raised and even if welfare
of child is paramount consideration then petitioner along with
his parents shall meet the child at Indore.

Thus, no ground for review of the order is made out.
Petition fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE

esh
ad
Anil*

Pr
a
Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR
CHAURASIYA
hy

Date: 2018.04.21 14:34:33 +05’30’
ad
M
of
rt
ou
C
h
ig
H

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation