Bombay High Court
Shraddha Gupta vs Sumit Jain on 3 October, 2018
Author: Bharati H. Dangre
Bench: Bharati H.Dangre
1/3 CAO-199-18 (single).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.199 of 2018
IN
REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO.16267 of 2018
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.1229 of 2018
Shraddha Gupta .. Applicant
Versus
Sumit Jain .. Respondent
...
Mr. Taubon F. Irani with Disha Shetty for the applicant in Civil
Application No.199/18.
Ms.Manjula Rao with Ms.Sushmita Sherigar for the respondent.
CORAM: SMT. BHARATI H.DANGRE, J.
DATED : 3rd October, 2018 (In chamber) P.C:-
1 This Writ Petition came to be disposed of by this Court by an order dated 13th April 2018 where the parties arrived at a consensus that they would find a school which is suitable for the child and would cater to her Day-care as well as good schooling need. Since the parties arrived at a consensus, I had refrained myself from going into the merits of the matter.
A Review Petition is taken out by the wife assailing the said order. The matter was listed before me on previous Tilak 2/3 CAO-199-18 (single).doc dates when the parties exchanged the list of schools in which the daughter Ahaana could be admitted. Today, Ms.Rao learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent has zeroed down and selected the school by name "Bombay Scottish School, Mahim. Co-incidentally, this school happens to be in the list of schools given by the wife. However, learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the school authorities have asked the father of the child to inquire with them in the month of January 2019 when the admission process would begin for the academic session. The respondent who is personally present makes a statement through his counsel that he is positive about ensuring a seat in the said school for Aahana and all the necessary efforts would be taken by him to that effect. In such circumstances, for admission to this school, the petitioner also has a consent. The only issue is that they wil have to await the decision of the school authorities which would be only in January 2019. However, since both the parties have arrived at a consensus that in the said school necessary efforts should be taken to secure admission for Aahana. However, for some reason, if this school is not ready to grant the admission, then the parties would again work out for some other school by consensus.
2 At this stage, Ms.Irani would make a grievance about the petitioner not being able to bear with the burden of 60% of her share and she would submit that this very order was Tilak 3/3 CAO-199-18 (single).doc assailed by her in the writ petition which was disposed of by this Court on 13th April 2018. However, I am of the specific opinion that since the order was passed by consensus of the parties and since the time the parties had agreed to choose a school by arriving at an amicable solution, the present arrangement needs to be continued and in any contingency, the education of the daughter cannot be disturbed in the mid of the academic session and this Court would then consider the submissions of Ms.Irani in the month of January 2018. Ms.Irani seeks leave of this Court to file necessary affidavit in regards to the efforts taken by the father for searching another school and e-mail correspondence exchanged by petitioner wife with the father. Liberty is granted. In case some contingency arises, parties are at liberty to mention the matter.
3 Stand over to 1st February 2019.
(SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
Manali Manali
Prasanna Tilak
Prasanna Date:
Tilak 2018.10.04
16:42:01
+0530
Tilak