Arpita Sen vs Niteen Popat Bhange on 21 December, 2018

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Arpita Sen vs Niteen Popat Bhange on 21 December, 2018

Bench: B. Veerappa

                          1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

                       BEFORE

         THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

       WRIT PETITION Nos.57275-57276/2018(GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

ARPITA SEN
D/O DEBASHIS SEN
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT
NO.CF-176, SALT LAKE
KOLKATA-700 065.

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT
APARTMENT NO.30,
22 RUE DE BOURRASSOL,
TOULOUSE 31300
FRANCE.
REPRESENTED BY HER
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
& FATHER
MR. DEBASHIS SEN.
                                        ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
     SRI VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

NITEEN POPAT BHANGE
S/O POPAT NARHARI BHANGE
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.TH-B-20
PURVA PARKRIDGE
                                2

GHOSHALA ROAD
GARUDACHARPALYA
MAHADEVAPURA,
BANGALORE-560 048.
                                              ... RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. PRAMILA NESARGI, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI RAMA R. IYER, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

                             ......

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. PRL. FAMILY COURT BENGALURU ON I.A.NOS. 3 & 4 IN MISC.173/2018 AT ANNEXURE-L THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN WP No. 57275/2018

The petitioner/wife filed W.P.No.57275/2018 against the order dated 30.11.2018 on I.A.No.3 passed by the III Addl. Principal Family Judge, Bengaluru, permitting the husband to have the interim custody of the child from 23.12.2018 till 30.12.2018 and to bear all expenses of the child and take care of the child during its visit to India.

2. After arguing the matter for some time, the learned Senior Counsel for both the parties, taking into consideration the paramount interest of the child, submit that, the impugned order may be modified and the custody of the child may be given to the father from 01.01.2019 to 06.01.2019 along with the mother of the child, instead of 23.12.2018 to 30.12.2018, as ordered by the Family Court.

3. In view of the fair submission made by learned Senior Counsel for both the parties, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, it is suffice to modify the impugned order permitting the respondent herein (father of the child) to have the interim custody of the child from 01.01.2019 till 06.01.2019 along with the mother and respondent shall take care of the child as well as farmer-wife for six days as aforementioned, without harming them mentally and physically. 4

with the above observations, writ petition is disposed of.

ORDER IN WP No. 57276/2018

Sri Udaya Holla, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that the petitioner is not challenging the impugned order passed on I.A.No.4 and therefore, W.P.No.57276/2018 may be disposed of as not pressed. The said submission is placed on record.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to execute a proper power of attorney in terms of the provisions of the Powers of Attorney Act, 1882 and the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.

Sd/-

JUDGE kcm

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court