Sahil Kumar Gaba Vs Heena Gaba — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Sahil Kumar Gaba Vs Heena Gaba — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Family Court, SBS Nagar, seeking clarification of the unspecified points (date/time/place of visitation; deposit account); pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the respondent under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for alleged willful disobedience of the directions in the Family Court judgment dated 30.09.2024. +1 more

Court's answer

As defined under Section 2-B of the Act of 1971, willful disobedience or willful breach of an undertaking given to a Court is required in order to initiate proceedings under Section 10 of the Act of 1971.

Ratio / Principle

The judgment and decree passed by the Family Court on 30.09.2024 is ambiguous: the date and time for the petitioner's meetings with the minor child were neither fixed in the order nor was any mechanism provided for fixing them; the place of meeting was not fixed; and the account number for depositing the agreed Rs.1,00,000/- for the child's admission fee and study is missing.

Key takeaways

Since the terms and conditions were neither agreed between the parties nor fixed by the Family Court, no specific direction of the Family Court can be held to have been violated by the respondent.ratio¶25
In such circumstances, no case is made out for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent under Section 10 of the Act of 1971.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — S.10 proceedings — Consent decree under S.13-B, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Family Court, SBS Nagar, 30.09.2024) left the date/time and place of the father's visitation with the minor child unfixed, provided no mechanism for fixing them, and omitted the account number for the agreed Rs.1,00,000/- admission-fee/study deposit. Holding: since such terms were neither agreed between the parties nor fixed by the Family Court, no specific direction of the Family Court can be held to have been violated; as defined under S.2-B of the Act of 1971, willful disobedience or willful breach of an undertaking given to a Court is a prerequisite for initiating S.10 proceedings; accordingly no case was made out for contempt. Petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek clarification of these points from the Family Court, SBS Nagar. (Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan, oral; 11.08.2025)

COCP-1462-2025 (O&M)

1

Sr. No.104

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP-1462-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 11^th August 2025

SAHIL KUMAR GABA

.....…Petitioner

versus

HEENA GABA

.......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present: Mr. Manbir Singh Batth, Advocate for the petitioner.

HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (ORAL)

The instant petition has been filed for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act of 1971” ), for intentionally and willfully disobeying the directions passed by this Court vide judgment dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-2), passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it was agreed between the parties that the petitioner (husband) will have visitation rights to meet the minor child once in a month and he was also given the right to talk to the child daily on mobile phone. The custody of the minor girl child was agreed to be given to the mother (respondent).

2.1 It is further contended that the respondent has violated the said undertaking given before the Family Court as the petitioner was rarely allowed to talk to the minor child on phone. Though, he was allowed to meet the child on 30.10.2024 only for one hour, but subsequently, regular meeting

SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2025.08.13 17:03of the petitioner with the minor child was not allowed, as such, the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-1462-2025 (O&M) 2

respondent (wife) has willfully disobeyed the order passed by the Civil Court and proceedings under Section 10 of the Act of 1971, are liable to be initiated against her.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book.

The order dated 30.09.2024 was passed by the Family Court, SBS Nagar, in a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, with the consent of the parties. It has been observed that with regard to the visitation rights of the minor child, the specific terms and conditions were neither agreed to between the parties nor decided by the Family Court, as such, the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, is ambiguous on various points including:-

(a) The date and time for meeting of the petitioner with the minor child was neither fixed in the order nor any mechanism was provided for fixing such date and time.

(b) The place of meeting the petitioner with her minor daughter was also not fixed.

(c) The account number in which the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for admission fee and study of the minor child, as agreed by petitioner No.2-husband before the Family Court, has to be desposited, is also missing.

Since such terms and conditions were neither agreed between the parties nor fixed by the Family Court, as such, no specific directions by the Family Court can be held to be violated by the respondent. As defined under Section 2-B of the Act of 1971, there has to be a willfull disobedience or willfull breach of an undertaking given to a Court in order to initiate the proceedings under Section 10 of the Act of 1971.

SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2025.08.13 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-1462-2025 (O&M)

3

In such circumstances, no case is made out for initiation of contempt proceedings under Section 10 of the Act of 1971.

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty

to the petitioner to file an application before the Family Court, SBS Nagar, seeking clarification on the aforesaid points.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed

of.

(HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN) JUDGE

11^th August 2025

simran

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2025.08.13 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document