SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Roohi Ajay Matai @ Roohi Satsangi vs Ajay Krishan Matai on 28 November, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-6081-2018 (O M)
Date of decision: 18.11.2019

Roohi Ajay Matai @ Roohi Satsangi …. Appellant

V/s

Ajay Krishan Matai …Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present: Mr. Karan Singla, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. D.D. Singla, Advocate, for the respondent.

*****
RAJAN GUPTA , J. (Oral)

Pursuant to order dated October 18, 2019 report from the

Secretary DLSA has been received.

Present appeal emanates from the order dated 13.07.2018

passed by the Family Court at Gurugram whereby the petition filed by

petitioner-father of the minor child namely Akshar Ajay Matai @ Akshar

Ajay, for custody was allowed regarding visitation rights to the mother.

Marriage of the petitioner-Ajay Krishan Matai (respondent herein) and

respondent-Roohi Ajay Matai @ Roohi Satsangi (appellant herein) was

solemnized on 18.04.2008 as per Sikh rites. A son was bron out of the

wedlock on 18.11.2010. Certain differences developed between the couple

due to which they separated. On 03.11.2017, petitioner-husband instituted a

petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and SectionWards Act, 1890 before the

Family Court at Gurugram seeking permanent custody of the child.

Notice of the petition was issued to the respondent-wife. Her

counsel put an appearance and sought time. However, he failed to file any

1 of 2
10-12-2019 00:19:19 :::
FAO-6081-2018 (O M) ::2::

written statement. As a result, defence of the wife was struck off vide order

dated 15.08.2017. The counsel also failed to cross-examine the witnesses

produced by the petitioner-husband. It is stated before this court that the

application in this regard has been filed against the counsel before the Bar

Council. In absence of the rebuttal by the respondent-wife, the Family Court

has given certain findings which contained aspersions on the character of the

wife (appellant herein).

Under the circumstances, we have proposed that the matter be

remitted to the Family Court, Gurugram for the hearing of the matter from

the stage when the defence was struck off. Learned counsel for the

respondent-husband has no objection to this. He, however, submits that

visitation rights may be granted to the husband.

In view of the above, we allow this appeal and set aside the

order under challenge. Matter is remitted to the same court for a decision

afresh at the earliest preferably within five months. Respondent-husband

shall be at liberty to move an application for visitation rights before the court

below.

(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
November 18, 2019 JUDGE
sukhpreet

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : No

2 of 2
10-12-2019 00:19:20 :::

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