SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mehul Rathod vs Jigna Mehul Rathod D/O Bipinbhai V … on 22 April, 2019

C/SCA/7712/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7712 of 2019

MEHUL RATHOD
Versus
JIGNA MEHUL RATHOD D/O BIPINBHAI V MAKWANA

Appearance:
HARSH M KHEMKA(7880) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
RUTVIK H MODI(8236) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI

Date : 22/04/2019

ORAL ORDER

1. The present petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is filed for the purpose of seeking the
following reliefs:

“A. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to admit this
petition.

B. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue
appropriate Writ, Direction or Order fore expeditious
and early trial and hearing of Custody Application
No.CMADC/39/2017, under Section 7 of the Guardians
and Wards Act, pending before the Hon’ble Family
Court No.5, at Ahmedabad.

C. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass such
other Orders as may be deemed just and proper in the
circumstances of the case.”

2. Considering the peculiarity of circumstances which are
brought to the notice of this Court and in view of the fact that

Page 1 of 2
C/SCA/7712/2019 ORDER

age of the child is approximately nine years and the
proceedings are pending since long, it would desirable that
the petitioner may be permitted to make an application for
expeditious hearing of the main proceedings. Accordingly, the
present petitioner is permitted to apply for expeditious
hearing of the Custody Application No.CMADC/39/2017
pending before the Hon’ble Family Court No.5, at Ahmedabad
within a period of ten days from today. Upon such application
being made, considering the circumstances which are
prevailing on record, learned Family Judge is requested to
hear and decide the same in accordance with law and on its
own merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the
application. It is needless to say that as and when such
application is made, it is open for the learned Family Judge to
independently to decide the same and pass suitable orders in
accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed any opinion about the contentions which are raised
in the present petition. With the aforesaid observations and
direction, learned advocate for the petitioner, under
instructions, does not press this petition. In view of the above,
the present petition stands disposed of as not pressed.

(A.J. SHASTRI, J)
RADHAKRISHNAN K.V.

Page 2 of 2

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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