Gujarat High Court
Suryakant S/O Banjrang Lal Goel vs Richa D/O Shambhulal Agrawal on 9 July, 2021
Bench: B.N. Karia
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3019 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2019
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3019 of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
==================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the YES
judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? YES
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the YES
judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to YES
the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made
thereunder ?
==================================================================
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL
Versus
RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
==================================================================
Appearance:
MR PERCY KAVINA, Senior Counsel with
MS GARIMA MALHOTRA, Counsel &
MR BHASH H MANKAD, Counsel for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR ABHISST K THAKER(7010) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MS RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL - Respondent &
MS RASHI also present in Video Meeting
==================================================================
Page 1 of 7
Downloaded on : Sat Jan 15 22:32:40 IST 2022
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 09/07/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI)
1. This First Appeal was filed against the order dated
1.12.2017 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.2,
Ahmedabad in Execution Petition No.2 of 2017, wherein in the
execution of a mutual consent Divorce Decree dated 12.1.2015
in Family Suit No.669 of 2014 between Mr.Suryakant
Banjrang Lal Goel and Ms. Richa wife of Suryakant Goel at
that time in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding
between these two parties to the matrimonial dispute which is
also placed on record. In the said consent terms, visitation /
talking rights were given to the biological father Mr. Suryakant
Goel for child Ms. Rashi and the relevant part of that Decree as
quoted in the impugned order is quoted below for ready
reference:
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
"F. The Petitioner No.2 is having the custody of
Minor daughter, Rashi. As and when Shri
Suryakant Goel wish to talk with his daugther miss
Rashi, Shri S.V. Agrawal & Richa Goel will permit
the conversation between them and deal with any
mode of media/telephonic etc. as well as on visiting
at India by Shri Suryakant Goel. He can freely
meet his daughter for which Shri Agrawal & Richa
Goel will have no objection. It is agreed between the
parties that as and when Shri Suryakant Goel wishes
to meet his daughter he shall intimate Shri S.V.
Agrawal father of Richa S. Goel and he shall
arrange for the meeting as required from time to
time it is agreed between both the parties that they
shall intimate the other party well in advance so as
to arrange such visitation meetings. During
vacation period if Miss Rashi wants to visit her
father same will be allowed by Shri Agrawal and
her mother. If Miss Rashi wants to meet her father
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
at Canada then Shri Agrawal and Richa will fully
cooperate.
G. Both the petitioners admit of having the
freedom to reside independently and having the right
to marry any other person."
2. After the said mutual consent Divorce Decree, Ms.Richa
has married one Mr.Lakshman Agrawal, a businessman at
Ambaji, Gujarat and is presently living in Ambaji with her new
family including the child Ms.Rashi who is now aged about 13
years.
3. In pursuance of the directions of the Coordinate Bench of
this Court, vide order dated 07.02.2020 in Civil Application
No.1 of 2018 in First Appeal No.3019 of 2018, a Report of
Dr.Khushnuma Banaji, a Child Psychologist was called. Said
Psychologist Dr.Khushnuma Banaji held video counselling
session with Ms.Rashi on 03.04.2021 from about 10.43 a.m. to
11.46 a.m., i.e. for little over an hour. The said Report was
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
forwarded in the Court in a sealed cover and we have perused
the same. After perusal of the said Report, the same is again to
be placed in the sealed cover and kept as a part of record.
4. We also requested Ms.Richa, now married to
Mr.Lakshman Agrawal and Ms.Rashi to join this meeting as we
could not readily get into contact with Appellant Mr.Suryakant
Goel as he lives in Canada through video meeting today and
briefly interacted with them. After discussion with learned
counsel also and aforesaid interaction with Ms.Richa and
Ms.Rashi and both learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties all of them fairly agreed with the proposed order which
we indicated to all the parties and learned counsel in the video
meeting. This meeting, the other counsels appearing in other
cases in our Board were kept in the Waiting Hall.
5. Upon perusal of the Report of Dr. Khushnuma Banaji,
Clinical Psychologist, interaction in the Court with Ms.Richa
and Ms.Rashi and both the learned counsels, we are of the
considered opinion that for the present, the visitation / talking
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
rights given to the biological father of the child Ms.Rashi of
Mr.Suryakant Goel need not continue, as it may have adverse
psychological effect on the child Ms.Rashi who is of tender age
now but she appeared to be having clear and sufficient
understanding of the life as she told that she is presently in 9 th
standard only but want to become Scientist and intends to join
NASA. The said girl RASHI is now proceedings towards her
adulthood and we, advisedly, do not think it proper to disturb
her equilibrium or peace of mind as well as the present family of
Ms.Richa who is living with her husband Mr.Lakshman
Agrawal at Ambaji happily with other two children of
Mr.Lakshman Agrawal from his previous wife.
6. The family overall appears to be in happiness and good
financial condition. Therefore, the welfare of child Ms.Rashi
can very well be taken care by the present family where she is
living.
7. Accordingly, we dispose of this Appeal itself and
connected Civil Applications by removing the part of the order
C/FA/3019/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/07/2021
SURYAKANT S/O BANJRANG LAL GOEL v. RICHA D/O SHAMBHULAL AGRAWAL
of the Family Court below quoted above (Para F) with regard to
the visitation / talking rights given to the biological father
Mr.Suryakant Goel. The said position will continue and we
leave it absolutely to the discretion of the child Ms.Rashi who,
after becoming the major viz. achieving the age of 18 years,
may take her own voluntary decision about having talking terms
or connecting in any other manner with the Appellant
Mr.Suryakant Goel, Canada and we may make it clear that no
force of whatever nature shall be put on the said child Ms.Rashi
in any manner for the said purpose.
8. Except the aforesaid quoted part in Para F of the impugned
order of the Family Court, the other terms of the mutual consent
Divorce Decree are not being disturbed by us.
With these observations, modifications and directions, the
First Appeal and other connected Civil Applications are
disposed of. No costs.
(DR. VINEET KOTHARI,J)
(B.N. KARIA, J)
Bharat
