Allowed

Pankaja Pranav Joshi v. Pranav Ramrao Joshi

Bombay HC2 Aug 2021WP/4658/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order by the Family Court, Nanded, which granted access to a minor child to the father without providing the mother a hearing. The High Court set aside the order for violation of natural justice and remitted the matter to the Family Court for a fresh hearing on merits, maintaining interim video call access.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Family Court for fresh hearing; interim video call access continued.

Pankaja Pranav Joshi Vs Pranav Ramrao Joshi — Child Custody and Guardianship | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

30-WP-4658-2021.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

30 WRIT PETITION NO.4658 OF 2021

¶5

PANKAJA PRANAV JOSHI
VERSUS
PRANAV RAMRAO JOSHI

¶6

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Joshi Sachin G
Advocate for Respondent: Mr. G. S. Shembole

¶7

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

¶8

 DATE : 2nd August, 2021

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

.Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner takes umbrage,

¶12

to the impugned order dated 19/12/2020 passed by the Family

¶13

Court, Nanded, on an application filed by the father for access of
the minor son aged 5 years, whereby, the said application has been
decided on the same day, in spite of the request for time, made by
the wife. It is material to state, that a reasonable opportunity
howsoever short ought to have been granted, to the wife, to place
her stand on record, however without doing so, the learned Family

¶14

Court had granted access. The impugned order, is required to be

¶15

30-WP-4658-2021.odt

¶16

¶17

set aside on this short ground alone and the same is accordingly so
done. The learned counsels for the parties submit, that the matter
is now fixed before the Family Court on 13/08/2021, on which
date, the applicant, shall file her reply, to the application for access
at Exhibit – 65, with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the
non-applicant. The learned Family Court shall thereafter proceed to
decide the application on its own merits. The Petition is,
accordingly, allowed in the above terms. Rule made absolute. It is
stated that video call access has already been granted by the family
court in terms of the order below Exhibit-65, the same shall
continue for duration the application at Exhibit-65 is decided.

¶18

 (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

¶19

Sameer

Pankaja Pranav Joshi v. Pranav Ramrao Joshi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaja Pranav Joshi v. Pranav Ramrao Joshi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayyed Akhil Sayyed Ismail and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dropadabai Tulshidas Kurhade Patil and Others Vs Bharati Tulshidas Kurhade and Others

Shivajirao Uttamrao Chaudhary and Another Vs Manohar Shashikant Naik and Other

Sangita Omkar More Vs Omkar Digambarrao More

Vidhya Sanjay Patil and Another Vs Kopargaon Nagar Parishad and Others

Alka Arun Mhaske and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others