Ankur Bhansali vs Sonal Bhansali ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8145 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:33601-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1829/2022

1. Ankur Bhansali S/o Dr. Anil Bhansali, aged about 38 years, R/o 968, Raj Mahal Palace, Ashapurna Valley, Near New High Court Building, Jhalamand, Jodhpur. (Raj.)

2. Dr. Anil Bhansali S/o Late Prof. S.R. Bhansali,, aged about 65 years, R/o 968, Raj Mahal Palace, Ashapurna Valley, Near New High Court Building, Jhalamand, Jodhpur. (Raj.)

3. Dr. Kusum Bhansali W/o Dr. Anil Bhansali, aged about 65 years, R/o 968, Raj Mahal Palace, Ashapurna Valley, Near New High Court Building, Jhalamand, Jodhpur. (Raj.)

----Appellants Versus Sonal Bhansali W/o Ankur Bhansali, aged about 32 years, at present R/o 53, Gulab Nagar, Jodhpur and in alternate at Plot No. 157, Narpat Nagar, Near N.S. Garden, Pal Road, Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prateek Surana.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

Order

07/10/2023

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1.2.2021

passed by Family Court No.1, Jodhpur, whereby, the application

filed by the appellants under Section 12 of the Guardians and

Wards Act, 1890, seeking custody of the children for two days in a

month, has been dismissed, however, visiting rights as indicated in

[2023:RJ-JD:33601-DB] (2 of 4) [CMA-1829/2022]

the order during pendency of the original proceedings have been

granted.

2. The appellants have challenged the directions in relation to

the visiting rights granted to them to the extent that the order

required consent of both the children and praying that the meeting

place should be other than the residence of the respondent.

3. During pendency of the present proceedings, on 6.9.2023, a

grievance was raised that the application filed by the respondent

seeking monthly maintenance for herself and the minor children is

pending consideration since long before the trial court and same is

not getting decided, when directions were given to decide the

same expeditiously.

4. Pursuant to the order dated 06.09.2023 passed by a

Coordinate Bench of this Court, the trial court has passed the

order dated 29.09.2023 ordering for payment of interim-

maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month for the children

from the date of application. The court has further ordered that

the entire school fees and amount pertaining to books, school

uniform and transportation charges, be also paid by the appellants

for the children. The amount has been ordered to be deposited in

the bank account, details whereof were required to be indicated.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that, insofar as,

the amount of monthly maintenance is concerned, the appellants

would start paying the same with the month of October, 2023,

which amount would be deposited in the Bank Account particulars

whereof have been shared by counsel for the respondent with

him.

[2023:RJ-JD:33601-DB] (3 of 4) [CMA-1829/2022]

6. Qua the order passed by the trial court for payment of

amount of arrears of maintenance as well as expenses, it is

submitted by learned counsel that the next date in the execution

proceedings before the trial court is 9.10.2023, on which date the

appellants would put in appearance in the said matter and

whatever determination of the quantum is made by the trial court

pertaining to the arrears, the same would be paid by them within

one month from the date, the determination is made by the said

court.

7. Further submission has been made that the appellants shall

cooperate with the court in early determination of the amount.

8. In relation to the visitation rights, submissions have been

made that the direction given by the Family Court are impractical,

wherein, despite efforts made to enjoy the said visiting hours by

the appellants, on account of non-cooperation by the respondent,

the same have not fructified.

9. Submissions have been made that the children may be

permitted to meet the appellants at some neutral place and only

to this extent, the order impugned passed by the Family Court

may be modified.

10. Learned counsel for the respondent made submissions that

by way of an additional affidavit, the respondent has proposed the

residence of one Mr. Sanjay Gehlot for the said purpose and also

offered that respondent also would not remain present during the

period the appellants meet the children at the said place.

11. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the said

proposal is not acceptable to the appellants and suggested that

the children may be made available for the purpose of visitation

[2023:RJ-JD:33601-DB] (4 of 4) [CMA-1829/2022]

by the appellants at Kids Zone, near Hotel Novotel, Jodhpur on

every Sunday from 12 Noon to 04:00 pm and rest of the

indications made in the order would be followed by the parties.

12. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the

said modification in the order impugned and making available the

children at Kids Zone, near Hotel Novotel, Jodhpur on every

Sunday from 12 Noon to 04:00 pm.

13. In view of the above submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties, the order impugned dated 1.2.2021 passed by

Family Court No.1, Jodhpur, is modified only to the above extent

regarding the place, day and timing of visitation rights available to

the appellants.

14. It is expected of the parties that when the children are

brought to the Kids Zone, near Hotel Novotel, Jodhpur, for the

purpose of visitation rights as indicated, they behave appropriately

so as not to cause any distress to the children.

15. It is expected of the trial court to decide the execution

application filed by the respondent in relation to the order passed

on 29.9.2023 with utmost expedition.

16. With the above observations and directions, the present

appeal stands disposed of.

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (ARUN BHANSALI),J 28-SUMIT-DJ /-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)