Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Pooja Kedia Thr. Poa Holder vs Sandip Shankarlal Kedia on 30 November, 2016
Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, N.V. Ramana
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 17561/2013
(ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 29/04/2013
IN WPC NO. 2636/2013 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY)
POOJA KEDIA THR. POA HOLDER PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
SANDIP SHANKARLAL KEDIA RESPONDENT(S)
(WITH APPLN. (S) FOR DIRECTIONS AND EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. AND
PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND STAY AND OFFICE REPORT)
WITH
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 311/2013 IN SLP(C) NO. 17561/2013
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. AND )
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 440/2013 IN SLP(C) NO. 17561/2013
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 109/2014 IN SLP(C) NO. 17561/2013
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. AND )
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 457/2014 IN SLP(C) NO. 17561/2013
S.L.P.(C)...CC NO. 8152-8153/2015
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILING
SLP AND OFFICE REPORT)
SLP(C) NO. 12496/2015
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT AND PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES AND INTERIM
RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT)
SLP(C) NO. 11829/2015
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR DIRECTIONS AND EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. AND PERMISSION TO
FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)
Date : 30/11/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
Signature Not Verified
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
Digitally signed by
VINOD LAKHINA
Date: 2016.11.30
17:00:28 IST
Reason:
Page No.1 of 6
For parties (s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Mirnalini Deshmukh, Adv.
Mr. Vikram Deshmukh, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv.
Mr. E. C. Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Pranab Kumar Mullick, Adv.
Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Iti Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Puneet Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Guru Krishnakumar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Tenzing Tsering, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Bilal Khan, Adv.
Ms. Sneya Iyer, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
I.A. NO.5 IN I.A. NO.4 IN SLP(C) NO.11829 OF 2015 The prayers made in I.A. No.5 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11829 of 2015 are as follows:
“a) Direct the Respondent to co-operate and not to create any impediment, in the application to be filed by the Petitioner, before the Court at Dubai for temporarily lifting the travel ban on the child Arnav Kedia, for the period 12th to 20th February, 2016 and for the period 18th March to 9th April, Page No.2 of 6 2016 or on any other period thereafter as required and necessary; Or alternatively:
b) Direct the Respondent to file an application before the Court at Dubai for temporarily lifting the travel ban on the child Arnav Kedia, for the period 12th to 20th February, 2016 and for the period 18th March to 9th April 2016 or on any other period thereafter as required and necessary;” The grounds on which the travel ban, according the applicant/petitioner – Pooja Kedia, is required to be lifted is to enable her son Arnav Kedia, who is 11 years of age, to proceed to U.K. to avail of the services of one Dr. Peter Cuckow, a leading expert in the field in question, under whom surgery is planned.
Having regard to the scope of the reliefs sought and the grounds on which the same is founded we do not consider it necessary to traverse the allegations and counter-allegations levelled by the parties who seem to be at loggerheads. The primary concern of the Court, at this stage, would be to ensure that the child Arnav receives, Page No.3 of 6 what in the comprehension of the mother is, the best medical treatment available. Though repeated attempts have been made by the learned counsel for the respondent – husband – Sandip Shankarlal Kedia to convince us that medical facilities of equivalence, if not better, are available in Dubai and further that the petitioner – Pooja Kedia has violated or misused certain orders passed by the Dubai Court and, in fact, the Dubai Court had vacated its earlier order(s) lifting the travel ban, we would not be concerned with any of such issues in view of the limited consideration that this Court is required to give to the matter at the moment, as indicated above.
The comity of Courts would not, naturally, permit this Court to pass any order which would even remotely touch upon the jurisdiction of the Dubai Court. But the respondent – husband being an Indian citizen and being a party to the present proceedings before this Court would certainly be amenable to the directions that this Court may consider it appropriate to issue. In fact, in the earlier orders of this court dated 4th August, 2015 and 25th April, 2016 the respondent husband was directed by this Court to cooperate with the wife to have the travel ban lifted by the Dubai Court.
Page No.4 of 6 Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case we deem it proper to reiterate the aforesaid orders and direct the respondent husband to cooperate with the petitioner-applicant in filing an application before the Dubai Court for lifting the travel ban for a specified period for the purposes of travel of the child Arnav to U.K. to receive the necessary medical treatment.
Once such an application is filed, naturally, the same would be dealt with by the Dubai Court in accordance with the law of that country.
The present order, naturally, is without prejudice to the issues that the respondent may make with regard to the jurisdiction of the Court in Mumbai.
With the aforesaid direction and observation, I.A. No.5 in I.A. No.4 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11829 of 2015 is disposed of.
SLP(C) NOS.17561 OF 2013, SLP(C)..CC NO.8152-8153 OF 2015, SLP(C) NO.12496/2015 AND SLP(C) NO.11829 OF 2015 Delay condoned.
Permission to file and place additional documents and to file lengthy list of dates is granted Page No.5 of 6 Exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned judgment and O.T. is granted.
Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions. Appeals to be heard at an early date.
Contempt Petition (Civil) NO.311/2013 in SLP(C) 17561/2013, Contempt Petition (Civil) NO.440/2013 in SLP(C) 17561/2013, Contempt Petition (Civil) NO.109/2014 in SLP(C) 17561/2013, Contempt Petition (Civil) NO.457/2014 in SLP(C) 17561/2013, List the contempt petitions along with the appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.17561/2013 [VINOD LAKHINA] [TAPAN KR. CHAKRABORTY] COURT MASTER COURT MASTER Page No.6 of 6