Jharkhand High Court
Ms. Sheoli Hati vs Somnath Das on 2 May, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Rajesh Kumar
2025:JHHC:13152-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
F.A. No.59 of 2016
-----
Ms. Sheoli Hati, daughter of Shri A.K. Hati, resident of
Vijaya Haritage, Flat No.1711, Kamet, P.O. Kadma,
Jamshedpur, P.S. Kadma, District : - East Singhbhum.
... ... Appellant
Versus
Somnath Das, son of late Dr. Sachindra Lal Das, resident
of No.506 Block I, Krishna Apartment, No.13, Ali Askar
Road, P.O. and P.S. Bengaluru, District : - Bengaluru,
Karnataka. ... ... Respondent
With
F.A. No.68 of 2016
-----
Somnath Das, son of Late Dr. Sachindra Lal Das, resident
of 506, Block-1, Krishna Apartment, No-.13, Ali Askar
Road, P.O. Vasanthnagar, P.S. Cubbon Park, Bengaluru-
560052 (Karnataka).
... ... Appellant
Versus
Sheoli Hati, daughter of Sri A.K. Hati, resident of Vijaya
Heritage, Flat No.1711, "Kamet", P.O. and P.S. Kadma,
Town Jamshedpur, District Singhbhum East (Jharkhand).
... ... Respondent
-------
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
-------
[F.A.No.59/2016]
For the Appellant : Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate
[F.A.No.68/2016]
For the Appellant : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, Advocate
------
Order No. 44/Dated 2 May, 2025
nd
1. Both appeals are being taken up together.
2. Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, learned counsel is appearing
for the appellant-mother of the daughter while Mr.
Prashant Pallav, learned counsel is representing the
respondent-father of the daughter in F.A. No.59 of 2016.
2025:JHHC:13152-DB
3. The second case, i.e., F.A. No.68 of 2016, has been
preferred by the father of the daughter, namely, Somnath
Das, who is being represented by Mr. Prashant Pallav,
learned counsel and Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, learned counsel,
is appearing for the respondent-mother of the daughter in
this appeal.
4. Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, learned counsel has submitted
that he had appeared in the instant appeal, i.e., F.A. No.68
of 2016, on earlier occasion and had also filed counter
affidavit on 21.09.2022.
5. Learned counsel appearing for both the parties have
submitted that direction as contained in the judgment
passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Jamshedpur dated 31.03.2016, which has been upheld by
the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 11.07.2019 passed
in Civil Appeal Nos. 5388 - 5389 of 2019, has achieved its
effect since the daughter taken birth from the wedlock of
Sheoli Hati and Somnath Das, appellants in F.A. No.59 of
2016 and F.A. No.68 of 2016 respectively, is about to
complete her studies as she is now in Class-XII in Good
Shepherd International School, Ooty.
6. It has been submitted that as on date, the daughter
has attained the age of 18 years counting it from her date of
birth, i.e., 09.04.2007.
2025:JHHC:13152-DB
7. Learned counsel appearing for both the parties have
submitted that learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Jamshedpur vide order dated 31.03.2016 has decided the
issue pertaining to the admission of the daughter to a
Boarding School.
8. The daughter since has attained the age of 18 years
as also she is studying in the Boarding School, i.e., Good
Shepherd International School, Ooty in Class-XII, therefore,
the judgment passed by the learned Family Court,
Jamshedpur has lost its force.
9. Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, learned counsel appearing for
the mother of the daughter, has shown his concern
regarding the upbringing of the daughter, i.e., further
education, health and marriage, and has prayed that some
direction may be passed taking into consideration the
future of the daughter.
10. On this, Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned counsel
appearing for the father of the daughter, namely, Aditi
Bishakha Das, has submitted that the father of the
daughter has given him input that he will take all care
regarding welfare, education, health and the issue of
marriage of his daughter.
11. It has been submitted by Mr. Pallav that
Mr. Somnath Das, appellant in F.A. No.59 of 2016 and
respondent in F.A. No.68 of 2016, has always taken care for
2025:JHHC:13152-DB
the purpose of fulfilling the obligations which it to be
performed by the father of a daughter being the pious duty
of the father and there is nothing like that he will not
perform his accountability/responsibility as a father
towards his daughter (Aditi Bishakha Das).
12. Upon this, Mr. Sakaldeo Singh, learned counsel,
has submitted that F.A. No.59 of 2016 may be disposed of
in terms of the aforesaid submission made by Mr. Pallav
based upon the instruction furnished by the father of the
daughter (Aditi Bishakha Das).
13. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant in F.A. No.68 of 2016 has submitted that in
terms of the aforesaid submission, F.A. No.68 of 2016 may
also be disposed of.
14. In view of aforesaid submission, both the appeals
stand disposed of.
15. Pending interlocutory applications also stand
disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Birendra/
