Allowed

Santosh Devi v. Kamlesh Kumar

Rajasthan HC7 Dec 2022CMA/814/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a miscellaneous appeal challenging an order granting custody to the father. The Court set aside the impugned judgment, directed the mother to open a bank account under her guardianship with the father as a nominee, ordered monthly maintenance deposit, and permitted the father visitation rights on Amavasya every month.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment set aside; custody with mother; bank account under mother's guardianship; monthly maintenance deposit order; visitation rights granted to father.

Santosh Devi Vs Kamlesh Kumar — Child Custody and Guardianship | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 814/2022

¶3

Santosh Devi W/o Shri Kamlesh Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, R/ o Trilok Chand Suthar, R/o Amarnagar, Sirohi, Tehsil And Distt. Sirohi (Raj.)

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Kamlesh Kumar S/o Shri Pukhraj Ji Suthar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Posaliya, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi (Raj.)

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Bharat Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Anirudh Purohit

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶10

JUDGMENT

¶11

07/12/2022

¶12

The present misc. appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Smt. Santosh Devi under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for assailing the judgment dated 28.04.2022 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Sirohi in Civil Original Case No.142/2019 (CIS No.142/2019): Kamlesh Kumar vs. Smt. Santosh Devi whereby the petition filed by respondent-Kamlesh Kumar under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 was allowed. The appellant was directed to handover the custody of minor children, Harshita and Prateek to the natural guardian i.e. respondent-Kamlesh Kumar.

¶13

Assailing the judgment dated 28.04.2022, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the children are in the custody of the mother since their birth. The minor children in their growing

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CMA-814/2022]

¶16

age require emotional support, natural love and affection of the mother. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is also a natural guardian of the children and therefore, learned Family Court committed manifest error in directing handing over custody of the minor children to respondent-Kamlesh Kumar. Learned counsel submitted that keeping in view the welfare and well-being of the children, the appellant is ready and willing to allow the respondent-Kamlesh Kumar to meet the children and therefore, she has no objection if visitation rights are ordered and directed by this Court.

¶17

Learned counsel for the respondent-Kamlesh Kumar has placed on record a proposal for grant of visitation rights in his favour. Clause 2 of the proposal submitted by respondent-Kamlesh Kumar reads as under:-

¶18

“2. That the aforesaid matter is listed before the Hon’ble Court on 07.12.2022 and during course of the hearing the respondent made a request for visitation rights to meet his children on Amavas (i.e. no moon day) of every month at Family Court, Sirohi for two hours and in view there of the respondent shall pay monthly maintenance of rupees 4000/- i.e. Rs.2000 for each child in the bank account of the minor children to be opened under the guardianship of their mother in which the present answering respondent shall be one of the nominee”

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant under instructions submitted that visitation rights in favour of respondent may be allowed in above terms.

¶20

In view of aforesaid, the present civil misc appeal is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶21

(3 of 3) [CMA-814/2022]

¶22

The impugned judgment dated 28.04.2022 passed by Family Court, Sirohi in Civil Original Case No.142/2019 (CIS No.142/2019): Kamlesh Kumar vs. Smt. Santosh Devi is set aside.

¶23

The appellant is directed to open Bank Account(s) in the name of Harshita and Prateek under her guardianship in a Nationalised Bank within a period of 15 days from the date of this order, to which one of the nominee will be respondentKamlesh Kumar.

¶24

The respondent-Kamlesh Kumar is directed to deposit monthly maintenance in the tune of ₹4,000 i.e. ₹2,000 each in favour of Harshita and Prateek on or before 10^th day of every month in the Bank Account(s) so opened by the appellant.

¶25

The respondent-Kamlesh Kumar is permitted to meet his children namely, Harshita and Prateek every Amavasya (new moon day) of each month for 2 hours at 11:00 AM.

¶26

The suitable arrangement to facilitate the meeting of children with respondent-Kamlesh Kumar shall be made at Family Court, Sirohi.

¶27

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Record be returned to the Family Court forthwith.

¶28

No order as to costs.

¶29

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶30

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

¶31

53-RaviKh/-

Santosh Devi v. Kamlesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Devi v. Kamlesh Kumar

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

Nora Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kishan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramswaroop Vs State of Rajasthan

Roopa Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Gom Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Ranjan Mathur Vs State of Rajasthan