Delhi High Court
Rahul Aggarwal vs Aarti Aggarwal & Anr. on 29 May, 2024
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher, Amit Bansal
$~35
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 29.05.2024
+ MAT.APP.(F.C.) 184/2024
RAHUL AGGARWAL ..... Appellant
Through: Mr Shiv K. Gautam with Mr Rohit
Gutpa, Mr Jatin Malhotra and Mr
Shanu Ansari, Advocates.
versus
AARTI AGGARWAL & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Counsel for the respondents
(appearance not given).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 184/2024 and CM APPL. 32890/2024 [Application filed
on behalf of the appellant seeking interim relief]
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated
22.05.2024 passed by Sh. M.P. Singh, Judge, Family Court, Tiz Hazari
Court, Delhi, on an application preferred by respondent no.1/mother under
Section 43(2) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 [in short "Act"].
3. The record shows that the child is, approximately, four (4) years and
ten (10) months old.
4. The record also discloses that since the separation of the couple which
took place in and about July 2023, the child has remained in the custody of
the respondent/mother.
5. Via the impugned judgment and order, the Family Court has permitted
respondent no.1/mother to withdraw the child from the school he was
admitted to, i.e., Salwan Public School, Rajender Nagar, Delhi, and have
him admitted to one of the schools in Meerut since the respondent/mother
had lost her job in Delhi. It appears that respondent no.1/mother has
obtained a job in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
6. The Family Court, via the very same order, has also issued directions
to facilitate interaction between the appellant/father and the child, albeit, via
WhatsApp. Accordingly, the appellant/father is entitled to interact with the
child every Saturday and Sunday, from 05.00 P.M. to 05.30 P.M.
7. The main matter and other pending applications have been listed for
hearing on 31.07.2024.
8. Counsel for the appellant/father says that, for the moment, the only
relief the appellant/father seeks is that he should have physical interaction
with the child during summer vacations.
9. We are informed that an application under Section 12 read with
Section 26 of the Act with several reliefs, including access to the child
during summer vacations, has been filed by the appellant/father and remains,
presently, unaddressed.
10. Given this position, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
concerned Family Court to take up the application filed by the
appellant/father for consideration.
10.1 For this purpose, the parties and their respective counsel will present
themselves before the Family Court on 03.06.2024.
10.2 Since the counsel for the respondents is present, he will take note of
the direction issued above, and duly inform respondent no.1/mother about
the fact that the application will be taken by the Family Court on the date
given above.
11. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
12. Consequently, pending interlocutory applications shall also stand
closed.
13. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
AMIT BANSAL, J
MAY 29, 2024/tr
