Disposed

Parul Gaurang Sharma Formerly Known as Parul Kaushal v. Gaurang Rajendra Sharma

Bombay HC29 Aug 2024MCA/368/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought directions in matrimonial dispute with pending domestic violence, restitution and custody proceedings. Court permitted husband to attend mediation at Palghar via video conferencing, asked Palghar judge to appoint a mediator, wife not to insist on husband's and in-laws' presence in DV proceedings, compliance report to be sent; matters tagged together.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued for mediation by video conferencing; wife not to insist on husband's/in-laws' attendance in DV proceedings; compliance report ordered; transfer application tagged.

Parul Gaurang Sharma Formerly Known as Parul… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

LSP 1 22 mca 368.24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Misc. Civil Application No.368 of 2024

¶4

… Parul Gaurang Sharma Applicant V/s. … Gaurang Rajendra Sharma Respondent

¶5

Digitally signed by LATA LATA SUNIL SUNIL PANJWANI PANJWANI Date: 2024.12.04 17:54:57 +0530

¶6

Mr. Gaurav Parkar	Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Sanjeev P. Kadam with Varsha M. Thorat, Pratik	Advocate for Respondent.
Deshmukh i/b. Prashant P. Raut
CORA	M : S.M. MODAK, J
DAT	E : 22 November 2024.

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

Heard learned Advocate Shri Parkar for the applicant-wife and learned Advocate Shri Kadam for the respondent-husband.

¶9

There is domestic violence proceedings filed by the wife before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Palghar. There are interim applications filed in the domestic violence proceedings. It is at the stage of deciding interim application. The restitution petition is pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Palghar. There are two children out of this wedlock. At present, the custody is with the applicant-wife.

¶10

The respondent-husband has filed a custody petition before

¶11

LSP 2 22 mca 368.24.doc

¶12

the Family Court at Mumbai. He is pressing for custody of both the children. At present he is posted at Chennai in southern railway. For him it is difficult to travel every now and then. The applicant is desirous of joining the company of the husband but according to husband it is not in the interest of the parties. It is better if the settlement process can be initiated. In view of that following directions are issued:-

¶13

(i) The respondent-husband is at liberty to appear before the learned Mediator at Palghar through video conferencing.

¶14

(ii) The concerned Judge to appoint a Mediator either Judge/panel Advocate.

¶15

(iii) The applicant-wife not to insist upon the presence of the respondent-husband and in-laws in domestic violence proceedings.

¶16

(iv) Learned judge seized of the matter to send compliance report.

¶17

Stand over to 3 January 2025.

¶18

There is also a transfer application filed by the respondenthusband being MCA (st)No.25061/2024 in which wife is served. Both the matters be tagged together.

¶19

LSP 3 22 mca 368.24.doc

¶20

The Learned Advocate Shri Kadam assures to give instructions not to insist upon the hearing of the Custody Petition pending before Family Court, Bandra

¶21

(S.M. MODAK, J.)

Parul Gaurang Sharma Formerly Known as Parul Kaushal v. Gaurang Rajendra Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parul Gaurang Sharma Formerly Known as Parul Kaushal v. Gaurang Rajendra Sharma

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sarath Manari Gopinathan vs Rahul Rajendranath Khanna

Premchand Prabhakar Vanjare Deceased Thr. Lrs. Rajani Vanzare D/Lrs Sachin Vanzare vs Bhavana Jayesh Pandya and Ors.

Riya Rahul Suralkar vs Rahul Vishwas Suralkar

Mahadev Shrirang Ghadage vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhikaji @ Bhiku Chagan Rajmane and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhikaji@Bhiku Chagan Rajmane and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.