Ashwin W/O Ameay Raut vs Shri Ameay S/O Ashokrao Raut And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 7598 Bom

                                                                                      1                                                                wp2598.15

                                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                     NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                                                                                                                             
                                                           WRIT PETITION NO.2598/2015




                                                                                                                                  
    Ashwini w/o Ameay Raut,
    aged about 28 Yrs., Occu. Service, 
    R/o 94/a/b Adarsh Nagar, 
    Near Ram Mandir, Umred Road, 




                                                                                                                                 
    Cotton Market, Near Budha Vihar, 
    Nagpur.                                                                                                                                                         ..Petitioner.

                ..Vs..




                                                                                                       
    1.          Shri Ameay S/o Ashokrao Raut,                       
                aged about 35 Yrs., Occu. Business.

    2.          Ishant S/o Ameay Raut,
                                                                   
                aged about 4 and ½ years, 
                through respondent No.1 father.

                Both R/o Flat No.2, Congress
                  

                Nagar, Arvind Society, Opp : Shivaji
                Science College, Nagpur.                                                                                                               ..Respondents.
               



      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
                Dr. (Mrs.) R.S. Sirpurkar, Advocate for the petitioner. 
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 


                                                                     CORAM :  Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 22.12.2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard Dr. (Mrs.) R.S. Sirpurkar, Advocate for the petitioner. None

appears for the respondents though served.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Family Court

2 wp2598.15

rejecting her application (Exh. No.8) praying for grant of interim custody of

minor son aged 4 and ½ year at the time of filing of the application.

The learned Principal Judge of Family Court has considered all the

relevant aspects and has recorded a finding of fact that the allegation made by

the petitioner that the respondent No.1 (father of the minor child) has forcibly

taken the custody of the child is not correct. The learned Principal Judge has

recorded that the child has expressed his wish to reside with his father, that the

child is regularly attending the school and the grandparents of the child, who

are living with the respondent No.1, are taking care of the child.

The petitioner has not been able to point out that the conclusions of

Family Court are not proper and are not sustainable.

I do not see any reason to interfere in the matter. The petition is

dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.

JUDGE

Tambaskar.