Delhi High Court
Barnali Dutta vs Amit Malik on 8 August, 2011
Author: Indermeet Kaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 08.08.2011
+ CM (M) No. 918/2011 & CM Nos.14759-60/2011
BARNALI DUTTA ........... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner with her counsel Mr.
A. Hassan and Mr. Sanjoy Ghose,
Advocates.
Versus
AMIT MALIK ..........Respondent
Through: Respondent with his counsel
Mr. Hasan Anzar, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Yes
INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 The order impugned before this Court is the order dated
06.08.2011 vide which the petitioner wife had been granted
interim custody of the minor child Shaurya Malik between
09.08.2011 to 16.08.2011 (both days inclusive); admittedly the
child is on vacation in this intervening period; the husband had
also been directed to furnish indemnity bond in the sum of Rs.2
lacs with a surety of the like amount to ensure that he would keep
the child with utmost care and would deliver back the child to the
Court on 16.08.2011 at 10:00 AM. This order has been impugned
before this Court.
2 Learned counsel for the petitioner wife has pointed out that
the child is not accustomed to the father; he has not remained in
his custody since the time of the separation of the parents which
was in April, 2010; the impugned order calls for an interference as
the child is traumatized and is not in a mental state of mind to join
the father.
3 The matter was mentioned in the morning. On the request of
the parties, the parties were called to chamber along with the
child. Matter has been taken up at 03:00 PM. The Court has
interacted with the child separately as also in the presence of the
father and the mother. Child is 5- ½ years of age; he is
comfortable in the presence of his father; he appears to be willing
to join the company of the father but at the same time his loyalties
are towards his mother and his apprehension appears to be more
to the effect that his mother may not like his joining his father.
The mother is to join her job in Dubai tomorrow i.e. 09.08.2011;
her flight is scheduled at 07:00 PM. The child is more comfortable
in joining the company of his father tomorrow; he wishes to spend
tonight with his mother. After some discussion in the chamber it
has been agreed between the parties that the father shall pick up
the child from the house of the mother (house of the Nani) at
04:00 PM tomorrow and thereafter the child will remain in the
interim custody of his father till 16.08.2011 when as per
agreement between the parties, the father shall go to Dubai and
drop the child back at the residence of his mother. This shall be
positively on or before 08:00 PM on 16.08.2011. This agreement
has been arrived at as the petitioner wife states that it would be
difficult for her to come back to India to take the child on
16.08.2011 as it had earlier been agreed.
4 With these directions, this petition is disposed.
5 Copy of this order be given dasti under the signature of the
Court Master.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
AUGUST 08, 2011
a
