Disposed

Dharam Pal v. Baksho and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Jul 2009FAO/2358/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal filed against dismissal of custody petition. Court disposed of appeal based on party consent, granting appellant liberty to meet minor grandson once a month subject to specific timing and respondent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant entitled to meet grandson on last Sunday of every month between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. if child not available at last Sunday respondents shall inform and allow visit on other Sunday of that mont

Dharam Pal Vs Baksho and Ors. — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

FAO No. 2358 of 2008 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

FAO No. 2358 of 2008 Date of decision: July 22, 2009

Dharam Pal

........ Appellant

Versus

Baksho and others .......Respondent(s)

¶8

Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶9

-.-

¶10

Present: Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the appellant

¶11

Mr. Hitesh Sood, Advocate for the respondents

¶12

-.-

¶13

Nirmaljit Kaur, J.

¶14

The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 07.04.2008 passed by the Guardian Judge, Jalandhar, vide which, petition of the appellant under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 for the custody of the minor male child, namely, Harjit Singh, grand son of the appellant, was dismissed.

¶15

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant is the parental grand father of the minor child, Harjit Singh. After the death of his son, Lakhbir Singh, the custody of the child remained with Baksho alias Manpreet widow of Lakhbir Singh-respondent No. 1.

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant would be satisfied, if he is simply granted liberty to meet his grand son, namely, Harjit Singh, at regular intervals. He further states that he wishes to limit his prayer in the appeal only to the extent that the appellant may be allowed to meet his grand

¶17

FAO No. 2358 of 2008

¶18

son at regular intervals.

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection, if the aforesaid prayer of the appellant is allowed.

¶20

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the instant appeal is disposed of with a direction that the appellant-grand father shall meet his minor grand son, namely, Harjit Singh, on last Sunday of each month and, in case, he is unable to meet the child on the aforesaid day, he will not insist for the same on any other day of that month. However, if he is not able to meet his grand son on the last Sunday of each month at the behest of the respondents, the respondents shall inform in advance and allow the appellant to take the minor child on any other Sunday of that month. The appellant shall take the child from the house of the respondents at 10.00 a.m. on last Sunday of each month and bring back the child to the house of the respondents by 6.00 p.m. on the same day.

¶21

The present appeal is accordingly disposed of as a consent order in the aforesaid terms.

¶22

(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge

¶23

July 22, 2009 mohan

Dharam Pal v. Baksho and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharam Pal v. Baksho and Ors.

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

M/S Anand Brick Traders Vs M/S Garg Bricks Co. and Ors.

Arun Kumar & Ors. Vs Indusland Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Sucha Singh Flora Vs General Public

Lalit Kumar etc. Vs General Public etc.

Ishwar Singh Vs Rameshwar etc.

Rampal Vs Kanshi Ram and Ors.