Dismissed¶28

Dr. Smt. Maya Jain v. Dr. Vaibhav Jain

Chhattisgarh HC10 Nov 2025MCC/1147/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Modification of interim visitation order refused; MCC dismissed. Keywords: Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; MCC No. 1147 of 2025; FA(MAT) No. 296/2025; order dated 22.09.2025; interim visitation/custody of minor child; minor child Vikrant; Saturday visitation between 11 AM to 6 PM; independent venue — office of Department of Women and Child Development or restaurant of father's choice; mother as applicant/respondent, father as respondent; main appeal/matter pending before learned trial Court; no ground for modification; prayer for relisting rejected; dismissal.

What did the court decide?

No such ground has been made out by the applicant for modification of the order dated 22.09.2025 passed in FA(MAT) No. 296/2025; the said order is just and proper and does not require any change in the MCC. ¶24

Dr. Smt. Maya Jain Vs Dr. Vaibhav Jain — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:54744-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCC No. 1147 of 2025

¶6

Dr. Smt. Maya Jain D/o Shri Gulabchand Ji Shri Shrimal Aged About 34 Years R/o Near Jain Sthanak Bhawan, Mahavir Chowk, Kawardha, Tahsil And Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL District -Kawardha Chhattisgarh

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

Dr. Vaibhav Jain S/o Shri Dr. Sureshchand Jain Aged About 39 Years R/o Ganesh Chowk, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Vikrant Dental Clinic, Near Sumit Mandi, Basantpur, Rajnandgaon, District -Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Applicant : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey J. &

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

Per, Rajani Dubey , Judge

¶16

11.11.2025

¶17

The applicant/respondent has been filed a present MCC for modification of the order dated 22.09.2025 passed in FA(MAT) No. 296/2025, particularly, for deleting the sub-paras 3 & 4 of para 13 on the ground that these paras of order are very harsh for the respondent/applicant that the minor child will be given to father on

¶18

¶19

every Saturday in between 11 AM to 6 PM for their meeting at any independent venue, it would be either at the office of Department of Women and Child Development or any restaurant of the choice of the father.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent submits that the applicant/respondent who is the mother of minor child Vikrant upbringing him alone without help of his father who has already submitted before the Court that he has no money for maintaining the child and his mother and he never paid a single penny for education and other expenses on child and due to his own act and behaviour, he has been expelled from the services. He further submitted that the matter may be listed for hearing again after giving an opportunity to the respondent/wife and her son to appear before this Court or paras 3 & 4 of the interim relief may be deleted.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the prayer for modification of the order passed in FA (MAT) No. 296/2025, dated 22.09.2025 by this Court and submit that the said order passed by this Court is just and proper and there is no ground for interference or modification of the said order at this stage.

¶22

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, gone through the pleadings and perused the material available on record.

¶23

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments of both the parties, it is clear that the matter is still pending before learned trial Court for final adjudication and we modified the impugned order passed by learned trial Court vide its order dated 22.09.2025.

¶24