Partly allowed

Rishi Agarwal v. Dipika Agarwal Nee Khaitan

Calcutta HC4 Oct 2023CPAN/915/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court accepted a belated undertaking from the contemnor, dismissed the interim contempt application, and modified a custody order to allow the father to celebrate the child's birthday on the actual date.

What did the court decide?

Undertaking taken on record; custody order modified to allow birthday celebration on 23.10.2023; liberty granted to press contempt application.

Rishi Agarwal Vs Dipika Agarwal Nee Khaitan — Child Custody and Guardianship | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

13.10.2023 ct. 236 sk,sl. 2.

¶2

C.O. 1389 of 2023 CPAN 915 of 2023 (CAN 3 of 2023) Rishi Agarwal -vs- Dipika Agarwal nee Khaitan

¶3

Mr.Uday Gupta Ms. Bishalaxmi Ghosh

¶4

…for the petitioner.

¶5

Ms. Amrita Mitra Mr. Arindam Paul Ms. Parna Mukherjee Mr. A. Bandyopadhyay Mr. Ankita Sikder

¶6

…for the opposite party.

¶7

Pursuant to the order dated 4^th October, 2023, the contemnor Ms. Dipika Agarwal nee Khaitan was supposed to file the undertaking by 9^th October, 2023. But it is filed today, having affirmed on 10.10.2023. In Paragraph 9 of the undertaking, it is written that the contemnor received the copy of the order on 9^th October, 2023.

¶8

It is submitted by Ms. Mitra under the instruction of A.O.R Mr. Paul that the order was uploaded on 9^th October, 2023.

¶9

Refuting such contention, Mr. Gupta submits that the order was downloaded by the petitioner on 5.10.2023 itself. Belated filing of the undertaking is nothing but manifestation of the defying attitude of the contemnor.

¶10

Mr. Paul, learned A.O.R, however, maintains his stance that the order was not uploaded on 5^th October, 2023. However, report in this regard is attained from the office of

¶11

¶12

learned Registrar Listing, which indicates that submission of learned AOR is factually incorrect.

¶13

Ms. Mitra further submits that on 5^th October, 2023 the contemnor affirmed an affidavit in support of her undertaking without going through the direction given on 4^th October, 2023 which was not filed and a fresh undertaking was affirmed on 10^th October, 2023.

¶14

According to Ms. Mitra, nothing could be attributed to the contemnor for missing the deadline. Having seen the report Mr. Paul, learned A.O.R. changes his stand to submit that he could not access to the order.

¶15

It is really unfortunate to see the role played by Mr. Paul, an officer of the Court, who tramples all the ethics. He should be careful in future.

¶16

Since there is ample reason to presume that the contemnor was presented to comply with the direction given on 4.10.2023, the undertaking submitted is taken on record. 9. The application being C.P.A.N. 915 of 2023 is thus disposed of.

¶17

It is further submitted by Mr. Gupta that the 10^th birthday of the child is on 23^rd October, 2023 and the father wants to celebrate the birthday of the child on that day in Kolkata at 11A Ballygunge Circular Road where the father resides. A direction is sought for in modification of order dated 20.06.2023.

¶18

According to Ms. Mitra since the child has school on 23^rd October, 2023 and she wants to celebrate the day with her friends, the father can celebrate the birthday on 22^nd

¶19

¶20

October, 2023 and allow the child to go back to Delhi by late evening of 22^nd October, 2023. Since 23^rd October is the birthday of the child and father wants to celebrate the day in Kolkata, let it be decided by the child and her father. If the child wishes to she will to stay back for the celebration, if she does not want, she will not be forced to.

¶21

The order dated 20.6.2023 is thus, modified.

¶22

Liberty is given to the petitioner to press CAN 3 of 2023

¶23

before the Hon’ble Court having determination.

¶24

Department is directed to place the file before the appropriate Bench having determination.

¶25

(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J)

Rishi Agarwal v. Dipika Agarwal Nee Khaitan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishi Agarwal v. Dipika Agarwal Nee Khaitan

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

Tamal Chandra Das & Anr. Vs Rajaram Mundra

Arati Rani Saha Vs Tapan Dutta & Ors.

Board of Trustees of the Port of Kol., Kol. Port Trust Vs Amkar Furnishers & Anr.

Sambit Sarkar Vs Mina Mallick

Prakash Chand Vaidya & Ors. Vs Shaheen Khan

Biplab Bose Vs Mrityunjoy Bose & Ors.