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
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
(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
November 18, 2019 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : No
2 of 2
10-12-2019 00:19:20 :::