IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
TA No. 851 of 2017 (O/M)
Date of decision : 5.4.2018
Sonal Agarwal ……. Petitioner
Rajat Aggarwal ……. Respondent
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH
Present:- Mr. Shvetanshu Goel, Advocate, for petitioner.
Respondent in person.
1. Whether the Reporters of local newspaper may be allowed to
see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not.
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?
KULDIP SINGH J. (ORAL)
Reply filed in Court today and same is taken on record.
This is an application filed under Section 24 read with Section
151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for transfer of applications, pending
before the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon, to the
Court of learned District Judge, Mohali.
The facts of the case are that petitioner wife had instituted a
petition against respondent under Sections 7 and 25 of the Guardians and
Wards Act, 1890, read with Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and
Guardianship Act, 1956, before the learned District Judge, Family Court,
Gurugram, on 3.11.2016. The learned District Judge, Family Court,
Gurugram, vide judgment dated 30.5.2017, allowed the said application
and handed over the custody of minor girl of the parties, namely, Dishta
Aggarwal, to the present petitioner. Since respondent declined to accept the
visiting rights at the time of arguments, therefore, he was given liberty to
1 of 3
09-04-2018 13:29:49 :::
TA No. 851 of 2017 (O/M) -2-
file application for seeking visitation rights qua child. Petitioner, who was
earlier residing at Rohini, New Delhi, has now shifted to Zirakpur in District
Mohali. Both the parties do not dispute that FAO-4545-2017 is pending
before this Court and is fixed for 29.5.2018.
Now, after the decision of said application and during pendency
of appeal, respondent husband has filed two applications before the learned
District Judge, Family Court, Gurugram. In the first application filed under
Section 43 (1) of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, read with Sections 6
and 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, (Annexure-P-2),
he seeks regulating the conduct of respondent with respect to guardianship
of minor Dishta Aggarwal. In the second application filed under Sections
39 (A), 39(E) and 39(H) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, read with
Sections 6 and 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, he
seeks removal of respondent as guardian.
I am of the view that subject matter of both the applications can
be pressed in FAO-4545-2017, which is pending before this Court and this
Court while hearing the appeal can consider the contention of respondent
regarding regulating the conduct of present petitioner regarding the
guardianship. This Court can always decide as to whether order of grant of
custody of minor child to mother is justified or not ? Respondent can always
press before this Court that said order be set aside which will have effect of
removal of petitioner from the guardianship of minor child. The said
applications are nothing, but resulting in multiplicity of litigations regarding
plea which can be easily raised before this Court in the first appeal and can
be decided in appeal. As such both applications (Annexure-P-2 and
2 of 3
09-04-2018 13:29:50 :::
TA No. 851 of 2017 (O/M) -3-
Annexure-P-3) are withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge,
Family Court, Gurugram, and are transferred to this Court, to be decided
with FAO-4545-2017, fixed for 29.5.2018. Consequently, petition is
disposed of. Since main case has been disposed of, therefore, pending
application, if any, also stands disposed of.
Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes / No
Whether Reportable : Yes / No
3 of 3
09-04-2018 13:29:50 :::