Sukhdeo Mahagugai Meshram vs Hemlata Sukhadeo Meshram
2017 Latest Caselaw 2595 Bom

Judgment                                                                      fa649.06

                                       1



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 649 OF 2006.


      Shri Sukhdeo s/o Mahagugai Meshram,
      Aged about 46 years, Occ - Service,
      r/o. Chandur Dhore Post Warkhed,
      Tq. Tiosa, District Amravati, 
      at present 16, Dhanlaxmi Duplex,
      Behind Samta Flat, Subhanpura,
      Baroda, Tq. and District Baroda.                       ....APPELLANT.



                                    VERSUS

  1. Smt. Hemlata Sukhadeo Meshram,
     Aged 40 yeas, Occupation Government
     Service, staff Nurse, District Women
     Hospital (Duffrin Hospital), Amravati,
     r/o. C/o. Eknathji methuji Gondane,
     r/o. Mahatama Fule Nagar, Navsari,
     Tq. and District Amravati.
     (Appeal dismissed against Respondent
     No.1 vide order dated 02.12.2014)

  2. Dr. Mangla Jaikumar Dande (Gondane)
     Aged 34 years, working as Medical
     Officer at Govt. Bidi Kamgar Aayurved
     Hospital, Brahamapuri,                                  ....RESPONDENTS
                                                                            . 



                            ----------------------------------- 
                 Mr. S.R. Deshpande, Advocate for the Appellant.
                               None for Respondent.
                            ------------------------------------


 ::: Uploaded on - 26/05/2017                   ::: Downloaded on - 27/05/2017 00:34:49 :::
 Judgment                                                                              fa649.06

                                               2




                                       CORAM :  B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

DATED : MAY 22, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT.

Heard Shri S.R. Deshpande, learned Counsel for the appellant -

husband. None appears for respondent no.2. Appeal is already dismissed in

default against respondent no.1.

2. Challenge by appellant is to adjudication under Section 25 of the

Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act on 04.08.2006 by the Additional

District Judge, Amravati. By that judgment, custody of a daughter then aged

about 6 years was declined to him.

3. In present appeal this Court has passed interlocutory orders on

06.05.2008 and 18.10.2008 thereby initially permitting visiting rights and

then temporary custody.

4. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel has fairly pointed out that

Judgment fa649.06

daughter is born on 06.12.1995 and therefore, has already completed 21

years of her age on 06.12.2016.

5. In view of this event, it is apparent that the proceedings as

initiated are rendered infructuous. Consequently, the present appeal also

cannot succeed. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as infructuous. Rule

discharged. No costs.

JUDGE

Rgd.