AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
23 paragraphs · 497 wordsThe father of a minor child, namely, Trishanjeet Singha Roy, has filed the present revisional application challenging an order dated August 25, 2017,
passed in a proceeding under the Guardians and Wards Act, initiated by the petitioner for custody of the said minor child. By a previous order dated
August 29, 2016, the trial court directed the minor child to be produced by the opposite parties, who are the maternal grandparents of the child, on
every working Saturday at 1 P.M. in court, where the petitioner could meet his son from 1 P.M. to 4 P.M. Subsequently, alleging non-compliance of
such order by the opposite parties, the petitioner took out several applications to that effect.
While taking up such applications, the District Judge, Hooghly, vide Order No. 25 dated August 25, 2017, modified the previous visitation order and
directed that the petitioner should visit his minor son at the house of the opposite parties on alternative Sundays from 5 P.M. to 6 P.M.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that such modification of the earlier visitation order was beyond the jurisdiction of the court, since only
applications complaining of non-compliance of the said earlier order were being taken up by the court.
While hearing the said matter, due to the extremely fair gesture of the learned advocate for both sides, an agreed venue could be arrived at, since the
house of the opposite parties could be somewhat inappropriate at the present stage due to acrimony between the parties. Visitation of a minor child in
court, in any event, ought to be deprecated keeping in mind the plight of the child in such an atmosphere.
However, due to the endeavour of learned counsel for both sides and due to a fair approach of both parties, a venue has been agreed at for visitation
of the child.
Accordingly, C. O. No. 3618 of 2017 is disposed of by modifying the impugned order to the effect that the petitioner shall visit his minor son at the
agreed venue, that is, Strand Road, Chandannagar, Hooghly (opposite St. Joseph Convent School), on alternative Sundays from 5 P.M. to 6 P.M.,
beginning from the coming Sunday, that is, June 17, 2018.
It is made clear that such an arrangement is being made for the present and will continue during pendency of the Act VIII Case, however, subject to
further order(s) which may in future be passed in the court below on the prayer of the parties.
It is also made clear that the merits of the matter have not been gone into and all findings made in the present order and in the impugned order are
tentative for the purpose of such visitation and will not affect the court below at the time of trial of the Act VIII case. There will, however, be no
order as to costs. Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite
formalities.
