Disposed

Rishita Jatin Karani v. Jatin Kantilal Karani

Bombay HC5 Jun 2018CAW/1139/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court modified interim access orders during the current summer vacation to allow the children to visit Mumbai with their petitioner grandmother and great-grandfather. The order details accommodation arrangements and expense sharing while preserving the father's access rights and the scope of future custody litigation.

What did the court decide?

Access modified for current summer vacation to allow children to stay in Mumbai with parents and great-grandfather; father to bear expenses and facilitate travel.

Rishita Jatin Karani Vs Jatin Kantilal Karani — Child Custody and Guardianship | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

skc

¶2

caw-1102-18.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1102 OF 2018 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 11552 OF 2017

¶6

Jatin Kantilal Karani .. Applicant / Org. Respondent In the matter between : Rishita Jatin Karani ..Petitioner vs. Jatin Kantilal Karani ..Respondent

¶7

Mr. Vivek Kantawala with Ms Parul K. Vedak, Ms Bhairavi Waravadekar, Amey Patil for Applicant / Original Respondent. Mr. Gautam Ankhad with Ms Heena Chheda, Mr. Bharatkukar Jain and Mr. Ashish Venugopal i/b. Hariani & Co. for Respondent / Original Petitioner.

¶8

AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1139 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11552 OF 2017

¶9

Rishita Jatin Karani .. Applicant / Petitioner In the matter between : Rishita Jatin Karani ..Petitioner vs. Jatin Kantilal Karani ..Respondent

¶10

Mr. Gautam Ankhad with Ms Heena Chheda, Mr. Bharatkukar Jain and Mr. Ashish Venugopal i/b. Hariani & Co. for Applicant / Petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Vivek Kantawala with Ms Parul K. Vedak, Ms Bhairavi Waravadekar, Amey Patil for Respondent.

¶12

CORAM : M. S. SONAK, J. DATE: 05 JUNE 2018

¶13

P.C : (In Chamber)

¶14

1] Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1/5

skc

caw-1102-18.doc

2] Civil application no. 1139 of 2018 is not on board. At the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken on board.

¶19

3] Civil application no. 1102 of 2018 seeking clarification / modification of the order dated 5^th December 2017 has been moved relying upon the liberty granted in paragraph 11 of the order dated 5^th December 2017.

¶20

4] Although, several contentions have been raised as regards the maintainability of such an action, for the order, which is proposed to be made, it is really not necessary to go into such contentions, at this stage.

¶21

5] There is already, an order for expedition of Custody Petition No. D-42 of 2016. In fact, the Custody Petition was to be disposed of by 28^th February 2018. The time is now extended upto 31^st October 2018. Both parties, including in particular Mr. Jatin Karani has assured this Court that they will cooperate with the Family Court in the matter of expeditious disposal of the Custody Petition. The parties are also directed not to seek any unnecessary adjournments which invariably hamper the progress of the Custody Petition.

¶22

6] In terms of the orders in force, the father Jatin has already been granted access to the children during Summer vacations from 10 am to 7 pm. However, presently, such access, has to be availed at Vadodara.

¶23

7] By civil application no. 1102 of 2018, it is submitted that the position of access be slightly modified, so that the grand parents

2/5

skc

caw-1102-18.doc

and great grand father of the children, who are based in Mumbai, also, get to spend some quality time with the children. The great grand father is 85 years old and is in no position to travel to Vadodara to meet the children.

¶28

8] The objections as to maintainability proceed mainly on the ground that the previous orders relating to access have attained finality. Normally, there is no finality as such about interim orders relating to custody and access. Such matters have to be essentially resolved or at least attempted to be resolved on the basis of peculiar and manifold situations which arise in such matters. No doubt, the principle that the welfare of the children is paramount, is always required to be kept in mind. Such welfare cannot be placed in some straitjacket. Such welfare, in a given case, will inter alia include, opportunity to bond with family members and spend quality time with parents or grand parents or great grand parents. The request that the children come to Mumbai for a few days so that they can spend time with the grand parents or the great grand father, in the present case, is quite reasonable. As it is, the Summer vacations are on and some change, will certainly, not be harmful to the interests of the children. The fact that the great grand father is 85 years of age and it is not reasonably practicable for him to travel to Vadodara, is not seriously disputed.

¶29

9] Taking into consideration the aforesaid aspects, the orders as regards access deserve to be slightly modified, in so far as the current Summer vacation is concerned. This modification, will apply only for the current Summer vacations and is ordered in view of the peculiar and exceptional circumstances as aforesaid.

3/5

skc

caw-1102-18.doc

10] Accordingly, Rishita with the children will arrange to arrive at Mumbai's ITC's Grand Central Hotel at Parel (Lalbaug) latest by 10 am of 7^th June 2018. Jatin undertakes to reserve appropriate accommodation at the said hotel from 7^th June 2018 to 11^th June 2018, where, Rishita and the children, can stay during the said period. Lodging and boarding expenses for the aforesaid period shall be borne by Jatin. Jatin will be at liberty to take the children to his home at Matunga or at such other places in Mumbai between 7^th June 2018 and 10^th June 2018 (between 10 am and 7 pm on each of the days). Jatin to ensure that the children reach the hotel room at 7 pm on each of these days, including, in particular, on 10^th June 2018. Jatin to also reimburse air travel expenses in respect of travel by Rishita and the children. The access orders which hold a field presently are modified to the aforesaid extent in so far as the current Summer vacation access is concerned.

¶34

11] Mr. Kantawala, the learned counsel for Jatin, on basis of instructions from Jatin, makes a statement that Jatin will have no objection if Rishita withdraws the maintenance amount deposited by Jatin before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Mr. Kantawala submits that if such an application is made by Rishita before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, Jatin will not object to such withdrawal, though, this shall be without prejudice to Jatin's right in the proceedings instituted by him before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. This statement is accepted.

¶35

12] This Court, earnestly hopes that the parties, resolve their disputes amicably at the earliest keeping in mind the welfare of the children. If necessary, the parties, can opt for mediation.

4/5

skc

caw-1102-18.doc

13] Both the civil applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶40

14] Parties to act on basis of authenticated copy of this order.

¶41

(M. S. SONAK, J.)

¶42

Chandka

¶43

5/5

Rishita Jatin Karani v. Jatin Kantilal Karani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishita Jatin Karani v. Jatin Kantilal Karani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Asha Shantaram Kolaskar Vs Shri. Gurunath Bhagwan Kumbhar and Ors.

Madhukar Kanu Gaikwar and Ors. Vs the Additional District Collector and Ors.

Prakash Tejumal Aswani Vs the Chairman / Secretary, Bobby Pathak Avanue, Chs Ltd. and Anr.

Jatin Kantilal Karani Vs Rishita Jatin Karani

Giriraj Enterprises through Their Partner, Shri Ashish M. Malpani Vs Shri. Prataprao Atmaram Redkar and Ors.

Shri Kumar Balu Nikam Vs Shri Namdev Sadashiv Nikam