1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3109 OF 2017
Hemali Namdeorao Nete,
aged about 34 years, occupation :
business, c/o Smt. Suman
Namdeorao Nete, Plot No.27,
Ladikar Layout, Manewada Road,
Nagpur-27. ... Petitioner
- Versus -
Umesh Madhukarrao Wuike,
aged about 42 years, occupation :
service, r/o Plot No.3, Renuka Gharkul,
Maharana Colony, near Abhay Nagar,
Rameshwari, Nagpur. ... Respondent
-----------------
Shri N. Jachak, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Dharaskar, Advocate h/f Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for
respondent.
----------------
CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : JUNE 19, 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT :
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the parties.
2) This petition is filed by petitioner mother/original respondent ::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/06/2017 00:54:40 ::: 2 before learned Family Court in petition No. D-76/2015 challenging order dated 15/5/2017 passed by learned Family Court on application (Exh.42) filed by respondent seeking access to his daughter Vaidehi.
3) Learned Counsel for parties have referred to para 4 of the petition and pointed out that on 8/12/2016, respondent father had filed application for grant of access to his daughter Vaidehi on every first and third Saturday, which application is yet to be decided. It is also contended by learned Counsel for petitioner that after filing of said application, pursis was placed on record by petitioner before learned Family Court pointing out that child was not ready to meet her father and, therefore, matter was referred to Marriage Counsellor, who had interviewed the child and found that child was not willing to go to her father and report to that effect has been submitted to learned Family Court and in spite of specific report on record to this effect, application filed by respondent for seeking access to his daughter during the period from 5 th May 2017 to 5th June 2017 was allowed by the impugned order, against which the present petition is filed. However, there are no directions issued by this Court on issuing notice to respondent.
4) From facts as aforesaid, it is noted that vide Exh. 35 above issue is pending before learned Family Court in Petition No. D-76/2015 which, therefore, needs to be considered by the same. In the ::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/06/2017 00:54:40 ::: 3 circumstances, the petition is disposed of by issuing directions as below :
Learned Family Court seized with Petition No. D-76/2015 shall make an endeavour to dispose of application filed by respondent for grant of access to his daughter Vaidehi (Exh. 35) expeditiously and in any case, within three months from the date of receipt of writ of this Court.
5) The rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE khj ::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/06/2017 00:54:40 :::