Partly allowed

Smt. Sahitya Kulkarni v. Keerthi Kumar Pamrag

Telangana HC10 Sept 2024CRP/2347/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment partially allowed a civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution. The High Court found no illegality in the trial court's order regarding visitation rights and granted the petitioner permission to visit his child on every 2nd and 4th Sunday of the month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted visitation rights to the child every 2nd and 4th Sunday of every month between 10.00 am to 05.00 pm.

Smt. Sahitya Kulkarni Vs Keerthi Kumar Pamrag — Child Custody and Guardianship | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁵¹ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION N O:2347 OF 2024

¶7

Petition under Anide 227 of the constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order dated 18-07-2024made in t.A. No. 394 of 2oz4 in F.c.o.p, No. 16 of 2024 on the fite of the Court of the Family Court-cum-lll Additional District Court, Nizamabad

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt Sahitya Kulkarni, D/o. Neelakanlg_ Raor Wo. Keerthi pamrag, Aged g.[o_u!.:! years,. Occ. Private Service, R/o. H.No.5-7-343, Opp. NGOY; Ct"uq NTR X-Road, Nizamabad

¶10

...Petitioner / Respondent / Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

Keerthi Kumar PgmrqS S/o_ I/adhusudhan Rao, Aged about 40 years, Occ Private Service, R/o. H.No.2-35lA, Devraj Colony, tiear Sub-Station,^' 99pglp^yql,ltanmakonda,^{presently nlo. tOOZ,Anatreila in NW Contord,} NC-28024, USA

¶13

...Respondent / Petitioner / Respondent

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶15

Petition under section^'151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the order in l.A. No. 394 of 2024 in FCop No. 16 of 2oz4 dated 18-07 -2024 on the file of the court of the Family court-cum-lll Additional District court, Nizamabad pending disposal of the present civil Revision petition on the file of this Hon'ble Court.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri K Durga Prasad

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Meesala Vinod Kumar

¶18

The Court made the following Order^:

¶19

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER}

¶20

C.R.P No.2347 0F²⁰²⁴

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Civil^{RevisionPetitionis filed by the revision} petitioner/husband^{aggrievedby theorder dated} 18.07.2024^{passed.by the learned Family Court-cum-lll} Additional District^{Court, Nizamabadin I'A'No'3')4 of 2024} in F.C.O.P.No.16^{of 2024.}

¶23

2 Heard. learned^{counselfor the revisionpetitionerand} the learned, counsel^{for the respondent'}

¶24

I I

¶25

During the^{course of submissions, both the learned} counsel have agreed^{for grantingvisitation rigJrts to the} revision petitioner^{on 2"d and 4th Sunday of everlrmonth'}

¶26

Having gone through^{the record,this Court did not} fitd any irregularity^{or illegalityin the orderpassedby the} learned trial Court^{and in view of the submissionsmade by} both the learned^{counsel, this Court is of the considered} view that the order for^{visitationrights can be granted to}

¶27

¶28

¶29

revision petitioner on every^{2"d and 4th Sundayof every} month.

¶30

Accordingly, this^{Civil Revision Petition ispartly} allowed granting visitation^{rights to the revision petitioner} to visit his child on every^{2"d and 4*' Sunday of every} month in between 10.00 am^{to 05.00 pm. The remaining} order of the trial Court^{remains intact. Miscellaneous}

¶31

Petitions, pending if any, shall^{stand closed.}

¶32

Sd/. P. PADMANABHA^REDDY ASSISTANT^REGI'TRAR ,/ ,%

//TRUE COPY'/

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The Family^{Court-cum-lll AdditionalDistrictCourt' Nizamabad}

¶37

One^{CC to Sri K Durga Prasad,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶38

One^{CCto Sri MeesalaVinod Kumar' Advocate IOPUC]}

¶39

Two CD^CoPies

¶40

Vtu^gh

¶41

¶42

: I I I i I I t I I I :

¶43

HIGH COURT

¶44

DATED:1010912024

¶45

---. :-<br>1ll
( <br>1
).
1 B r lr 202$ '. li
\i. ),,
.,.'-,.,i,..r..

¶46

ORDER

¶47

GRP.No.2347 of 2024

¶48

PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRP

¶49

D
<br>

Smt. Sahitya Kulkarni v. Keerthi Kumar Pamrag

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sahitya Kulkarni v. Keerthi Kumar Pamrag

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bachalakura Andhra Babu Vs Bajjuri Ram Reddy

Ajmeera Chinna Suraiah Vs P. Nooka Raju and 2 Ors.

Munigala Bhaskar, Warangal District Vs State of a.P.,Rep.by P.P.,High Court, Hyderabad

Lingam Olla. Lingaiah Vs the State of A.P.

The Roads and Buildings Vs Chituveri Arun , Arun Kumar and Anr.

Talari Srinivas, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp.