Hemali Namdeorao Nete vs Umesh Madhukarrao Wuike
2017 Latest Caselaw 3335 Bom

                                                       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

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

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