Allowed

Harish Jindal v. Garima Jindal

Delhi HC16 Jul 2024MAT.APP.(F.C.)/220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court varied the lower court order in a guardianship appeal. While acknowledging physical meetings are currently not good for the child, the court granted the father liberty to interact with the 14-year-old son via WhatsApp video call every Sunday noon to 12:30 PM.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted for father to interact with the child every Sunday between 12:00 noon and 12:30 PM via a WhatsApp video call, effective 21.07.2024.

Harish Jindal Vs Garima Jindal — Child Custody and Guardianship | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~43

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 16.07.2024

¶4

- MAT.APP.(F.C.) 220/2024

¶5

HARISH JINDAL .....Appellant

¶6

Through: Mr Alok Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Mr Amit K. Singh, Mr Varun Maheshwari, Mr Manan Soni and Mr Sachin Kumar, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

GARIMA JINDAL .....Respondent Through: Ms Swaty Singh Malik with Mr Rohan Kumar and Ms Divisha, Advocates along with respondent in person.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶11

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

¶12

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

¶13

CM APPL. 39572/2024

¶14

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶15

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 220/2024 and CM APPL. 39571/2024 [Application

¶16

filed on behalf of the appellant seeking direction]

¶17

Issue notice.

¶18

2.1 Ms Swaty Singh Malik, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/mother.

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Page 1 of 3

¶21

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 220/2024

¶22

Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 19.0 7.2024 11:38:41

¶23

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.

¶24

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.06.2024 passed by Mr Harish Kumar, learned Family Court Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in an application preferred by the appellant/father under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards,1890 [in short, “Act”].

¶25

4.1 The operative directions issued are contained in paragraphs twelve (12) and thirteen (13) of the impugned judgment and order. For convenience, the same are extracted hereafter:

¶26

“12. Hence, at this stage physically meeting of the son with the petitioner will not be good for the child, however, he may meet the child virtually i.e. by way of letter, email or Whatsapp chat expressing his love and affection thereby trying to win him back or alternatively allow some more time to pass.

¶27

13. With aforesaid observation, direction and with liberty to the petitioner to reagitate for interim custody/visitation, the application of the petitioner u/s 12 of the G & W Act stands disposed of accordingly.”

¶28

Mr Alok Kumar, learned senior counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/father says that, for the moment, the appellant/father will be satisfied if the order is varied to the extent that the appellant/father has an opportunity to interact with the child (who is about 14 years old) via a video call made through WhatsApp.

¶29

Ms Malik, on instructions of the respondent/mother, says that the respondent/mother will facilitate the meeting through a video call via WhatsApp.

¶30

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with a direction that paragraph

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Page 2 of 3

¶33

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 220/2024

¶34

Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 19.0 7.2024 11:38:41

¶35

twelve (12) of the impugned judgment and order will stand varied to the extent that the appellant/father would have liberty to interact with the child every Sunday, between 12.00 Noon and 12.30 P.M., through a video call via WhatsApp.

¶36

7.1 This direction will operate from 21.07.2024.

¶37

Other parts of the impugned judgment and order will remain unaltered.

¶38

Pending applications shall also stand closed.

¶39

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

¶40

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶41

JULY 16, 2024 / tr

¶42

Signature Not Verified

¶43

Page 3 of 3

¶44

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 220/2024

¶45

Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 19.0 7.2024 11:38:41

Harish Jindal v. Garima Jindal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Jindal v. Garima Jindal

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

Anurag Yadav Vs Shikha Yadav

Tejinder Singh Vs Beverley Singh

Birender Deep Singh Kohli Vs Smt Deep Gagan

Amit Sharma Vs Sugandha Sharma

Renu Sharma Vs Mc Sharma & Anr.

Renu Sharma & Anr. Vs Mool Chand Sharma

Abhishek Kumar Vs Jyoti Jaya

Ajayan Pillai Vs Adrija Devi

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs M/S Ram Niwas Goel

Rita Wadhwa Vs Sanjeev Sarin (Since Deaceased ) Thr Lrs & Anr.

Rita Wadhwa Vs Sanjeev Sarin Since Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr.

Shivi Bansal Vs Gaurav Bansal

Himani Singh Vs Maninder Singh

Ekta Saluja & Anr. Vs Anita Bhatia