Allowed

Ajay Dahiya v. Smt Queeny Esther

Karnataka HC26 Jun 2024MFA/9584/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Custody appeal over the ward Sidharth Dahiya was settled amicably via a joint memo: custody remains with the appellant, respondent gets vacation custody and visitation. The Court recorded the memo and allowed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; Family Court judgment set aside; custody petition disposed per joint memo (custody with appellant, vacation custody and visitation with respondent).

Ajay Dahiya Vs Smt Queeny Esther — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:23634-DB MFA No.9584/2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9584/2018 (GW)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶9

AJAY DAHIYA S/O M.S. DAHIYA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT GF NO.02 PRIME RESIDENCY, HOOTAGALLI MYSORE-570001.

¶10

(BY SMT. SAMASHRITHA R, ADV., FOR SRI. NARENDRA D.V. GOWDA, ADV.,)

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT. QUEENY ESTHER W/O STANLEY JOSHEPH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT NO. 647, 3RD CROSS ABISHEK CIRCLE, M.G. KOPPAL VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE MYSURU 17.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. RUDRAPPA P, ADV.,)

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47 (a) OF G & W's ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2018 PASSED IN G & W NO.1/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 7 OF GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT.

¶17

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, K.S.MUDAGAL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:23634-DB MFA No.9584/2018

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Both parties, their counsel and ward Sidharth Dahiya are present before the Court.

¶22

The Court interacted with the ward and the parties.

¶23

During such interaction, the ward Sidharth Dahiya expressed that he enjoys the company of both parents. Parties and ward revealed that as per the interim arrangement order dated 27.03.2024 passed by this Court, the ward is being handed over to the respondent during vacations and the same is being followed.

¶24

The parties also submit the joint memo. The parties admit the execution of the joint memo and the terms of the same which reads as follows:

¶25

"It is submitted that as per the wish and best interest of the child and both the parties have amicably come to a mutual understanding and settlement that the custody of child by the name Sidharth Dahiya shall remain with the appellant and during the vacation the custody of the child shall be with the respondent, it is further agreed that whenever the respondent or the child wishes to meet each other, the visitation shall be permitted and the appellant has no objection towards visitation by the respondent herein. Wherefore the appellant and

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:23634-DB MFA No.9584/2018

¶27

respondent prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass the necessary orders in the interest of justice and equity."

¶28

On hearing, satisfied that the terms of the joint memo are in the best interest of the ward Sidharth Dahiya and admissible under law. Therefore, the joint memo is recorded.

¶29

6. The appeal is allowed.

¶30

The impugned judgment and order dated 07.11.2018 in G & W No.1/2018 passed by the I Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Mysore is hereby set aside.

¶31

The petition in G & W No.1/2018 is allowed in terms of the joint memo.

¶32

Draw decree accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56

Ajay Dahiya v. Smt Queeny Esther

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Dahiya v. Smt Queeny Esther

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

Lokesh Jagannath Vs Smt. Ranjeetha (Rekha)

The Executive Engineer Vs S.G. Ramesh Babu

Sri K Raghunath Shetty Vs Smt Shailaja P Shetty

Smt Roshani Mangalore Vs Sri N Vipin Suvarna

Sri R Jagadish Vs Smt Rajani K B

S Subramanyam Vs M/S Karnataka State Financial Corporation