Jharkhand High Court
Ms. Sheoli Hati vs Vrs on 18 April, 2018
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh, Ratnaker Bhengra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
First Appeal No. 59 of 2016
Ms. Sheoli Hati ............Appellant
Vrs.
Somnath Das ............. Respondent
With
First Appeal No. 68 of 2016
Somnath Das ............Appellant
Vrs.
Sheoli Hati ............. Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA (In F.A. No. 59 of 2016) For the Appellant : M/s Ritu Kumar, Tapas Kabiraj, Amit Kumar, A. Bhattacharya For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Pallav (In F.A. No. 68 of 2016) For the Appellant : Mr. Prashant Pallav For the Respondent : M/s Ritu Kumar, Tapas Kabiraj, Amit Kumar, A. Bhattacharya 13/18.04.2018 The Respondent Husband in F.A. No. 59 of 2016 in response to the I.A. No. 3149 of 2018 filed by Appellant Wife on 09.04.2018 has in his reply dated 13.04.2018 indicated that the La Martiniere Girls School, Kolkata has not responded to the request for registration and admission made through letter dated 05.04.2018 pursuant to our order dated 02.04.2018. The affidavit makes reference to 3 other Boarding Schools i.e., Good Shepherd International School, Ooty; KIIT International School, Bhubaneswar and Loreto Convent Entally, Kolkata, which have been approached for registration and admission of his daughter. The details of the admission process ; the date from which the sessions starts in these schools, apart from other essential details about the schools contained in their school brochure, however has not been enclosed to the instant affidavit.
Learned counsel for the Respondent Husband has prayed that further time may be allowed to produce the details regarding admission in the aforesaid schools as the academic session 2018-19 may be over in short time.
Learned counsel for the Appellant Wife has submitted that necessary efforts towards admission to the La Martiniere Girls School, Kolkata have not been made on the part of the father and sessions in other schools mentioned may have started by now. Otherwise also the child may be allowed to -2- continue in the present school as she has been admitted only last year.
Let the matter appear on 25.04.2018 as unfixed case. The Respondent Husband in F.A. No. 59 of 2016 may supplement the statements made in the instant reply with supporting documents in the meantime. Appellant Mother shall bring the child on the next date so that, if the Court considers it necessary, it may interact with the child to arrive at an opinion in this regard.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) ( Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) A.Mohanty