First Appeal No. 614 of 2011. Case: Deepak Satyanarayan Sharma Vs Kanchan. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Case Number | First Appeal No. 614 of 2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: V. K. Gulhane, Adv. |
| Judges | Smt. V. A. Naik, J. and A. B. Chaudhari , J. |
| Issue | Guardians and Wards Act (8 of 1890) - Section 25 |
| Citation | AIR 2012 Bom 175 |
| Judgement Date | July 23, 2012 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.
-
Admit. The appeal is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
-
By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of the Family Court No.4, Nagpur dated 11th April, 2011 dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 seeking custody of his two minor sons from the respondent.
-
Few facts giving rise to the appeal are stated thus:-
The marriage of the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 9th May, 2004 at Mangwadi, Tahsil Risod, District Washim, as per Hindu rites and customs. The parties stayed together till 31st August,2009. It is the case of the appellant that the respondent had started quarrelling with the appellant just after 15 days from the date of marriage. It is pleaded that the respondent and her parents went to Imamwada Police Station and lodged a false report against the appellant and his family members. The police had called the appellant along with his two sons to the police station. The respondent insisted for custody of both her sons. Though the appellant refused to give custody, on being threatened by the police, the appellant did not have any option but to handover both his minor sons to the respondent.
-
It is pleaded by the appellant that his elder son Alok is about five years of age and was taking education in the Nursary Classes in a convent school near Medical Square, Nagpur. It is pleaded by the appellant that the appellant was required to spend Rs.2000/- towards admission fees of Alok, his elder son, and Rs. 2400/- for the tuition fees. According to the appellant, though the books and uniform of his son Alok were purchased, the respondent carried Alok and the other son Mohit, who was just about 2? years of age and suffering from paralysis of his left leg to Mangwadi, which is a remote village. According to the appellant, the future of both his children was spoiled as they were removed from the advanced city like Nagpur to a remote and interior village like Mangwadi. It is stated in the petition that Mohit was suffering from paralysis of his left leg and was under medical treatment in the Government Medical College, Nagpur for more than six months. It was also pleaded that the appellant was residing with his father who owns 12 acres of land. The appellant was also serving in a Service Centre for the repairs of two wheelers and had sufficient income to provide good and proper...
To continue reading
Request your trial