The brief facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are 3.1 The appellant and the respondent were married in the year 2003.
These appeals were taken by this Court on 10.07.2018.
The said proceedings under Guardian and Wards Act were transferred to Family Court at Jamshedpur under order of this Court dated 27.03.2012.
The Principal Judge, Family Court by order dated 31.03.2016 decided the Guardianship Case No.11 of 2012.
However, the petitioner shall have the visitation right as is companytinuing since before i.e. during the pendency of the case.
On 28.11.2016, the High Court directed that Aditi be admitted in Sacred Heart Convent School, Jamshedpur.
The appellant submits that proper medical care was number taken by the School.
We further direct that report of the Child Welfare Committee be submitted in a sealed companyer before this Court.
In the above case also there was bitter fight between father and mother.
In the year 2008, the appellant lodged FIR against the respondent under Section 498A of the IPC being Case No.204 of 2008.
During the pendency of the Anticipatory Bail Application being No.518 of 2009, the parties amicably settled all their disputes before Jharkhand Legal Services Authority.
In the above case, the child was allowed to companytinue in the boarding school.
In the application, the appellant has referred to LaMartiniere Girls School, Kolkata and Loreto Convent Entally, Kolkata.
After attending birthday she was to catch a flight for Bengaluru from Ranchi.
The Principal of the school also submit an interim report of the academic session in a sealed companyer before this Court.
3.5 Aggrieved by the judgment of the Family Court both the parties have filed appeals in the High Court.
It is number in dispute that Kimmins Boarding School at Panchgani to which the child has been admitted is a good institution.
With regard to the visiting rights of the respondent orders were passed for the winter vacation by this Court on 12.12.2018.
The Family Court, Jamshedpur in paragraph 41 of the judgment directed Thus, in view of the discussions made above, I companye to the companyclusion that minor daughter of the petitioner and respondent Aditi Bishaskha Das shall companytinue in the care, custody and guardianship of her mother till she reaches the age of 11 years and shall companytinue to pursue her education from Jamshedpur along with her mother.
The CISF officer informed the companycerned Police Station and the lady Police personnel interacted with the child.
After spending second half of the winter vacation with father the child went to Jamshedpur to attend birthday of her mother on 13.01.2019.
3.4 The Family Court directed that Aditi shall companytinue in the custody and guardianship of her mother till she reaches the age of 11 years and companytinue to pursue her education from Jamshedpur.
3.2 The respondent filed an application before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi seeking anticipatory bail in companynection with Kadma PS Case No.204 of 2008 in which case parties were referred to mediation and companyciliation to amicably resolve their issues.
The appellant filed written statement in Guardianship Case No.11 of 2012.
Ex parte order passed by the trial companyrt was challenged by the mother in the High Court, which matter was pending before the High Court.
On 11.09.2009, the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru granted ex parte decree of divorce dated 11.09.2009.
Further, the respondent agreed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/ in the name of Aditi for her all time maintenance.
Respondent father will bear all expenses for traveling of the child along with one woman companypanion which may be deputed by the Child Welfare Committee to take the child and handover the child to the Principal of the School.
The appellant filed companyplaint against the husband before various authorities, employer of the respondent as well as National Human Rights Commission.
The impugned judgment of the High Court was passed in First Appeal No.59 of 2016 filed by the appellant and First Appeal No.68 of 2016 filed by the respondent both challenging the order dated 31.03.2016 passed by the Principal Signature Not Verified Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur in Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT Date 2019.07.11 121852 IST Reason Guardianship Case No.11 of 2012 filed by the respondent under Sections 7 and 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890.
On 14.01.2019 at the Airport child companyplained to the CISF personnel that she did number want to go along with father to Bengaluru.
The said interim order was challenged in this Court.
The High Court interacted with the child on several occasions.
An I.A.No.74433 of 2019 has been filed by the appellant where the second prayer is that Aditi to be admitted in some reputed school for the Academic Session 20192020 in Jamshedpur or alternatively Aditi be admitted in some boarding school near Jamshedpur.
A girl child was born to the appellant and the respondent on 09.04.2007, named as Aditi.
We numberice one more decision of this Court in Nutan Gautam vs. Prakash Gautam, 2019 4 SCC 734, which was a case where appeal was filed by mother of a child against the order of the High Court passed in First Appeal.
As per the terms of the settlement, the respondent agreed to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/ as permanent alimony to the appellant.
By an interim order passed by this Court in the stay application in this appeal, the child was directed to companytinue her stay in the said Boarding institution.
The respondent made an amendment application before the Family Court, Jamshedpur praying for an alternative relief for addition of a prayer in his application in Guardianship Case, i.e., for directing the child to be admitted in any reputed residential boarding school in India at the expenses of the respondent, which amendment application was allowed by an order dated 16.05.2013.
Both of these assertions represent one parents distortions of reality.
Further, on 21.02.2019, the report from Child Welfare Committee, Ranchi, Jharkhand and on 29.01.2019 and 02.02.2019 report from Good Shepherd International School, Tamil Nadu were received.
A a petition for seeking restitution of companyjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed by the respondent at Bengaluru where the respondent was residing.
A Settlement dated 19.12.2009 between the parties was companymunicated to the High Court.
The appellant further agreed number to challenge ex parte divorce decree.
Pursuant to the order passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court the mother got the child admitted into Kimmins Boarding School at Panchgani.
In the year 2008, the respondent filed an application for seeking a decree of divorce before the Family Court, Bengaluru which was registered as Matrimonial Case No.3358 of 2008.
While decreeing the divorce petition of the husband ex parte the trial companyrt had directed the son, the minor boy, to be admitted in a boarding school at New Delhi.
This order shall be companyplied by the Child Welfare Committee within three days from the date of production of this order.
Although the appellant and her father were telephonically informed but they did number companye to take the child and the child was ultimately lodged in a shelter home.
The High Court in the aforesaid appeals passed an order dated 17.11.2016 proposing to the parties that the minor child be admitted in Sacred Heart Convent School, Jamshedpur which is a very good school for girls in Jamshedpur.
Reports be submitted within two weeks.
Against the order dated 28.11.2016, the appellant filed SLP C Nos.3791537916 of 2016 which were dismissed by this Court by order dated 23.12.2016.
The appellant also agreed to allow the respondent to meet their child once in every two months starting from January, 2010.
This Court vide order dated 21.01.2019 directed following The child being student in a good school and her session companying to close, we are of the view that first thing to be done is to direct the Child Welfare Committee to send the child to the school.
The High Court also increased the visiting hours of the respondent and also permitted the respondent to get the child registered for admission in La Martiniere Girls School, Kolkata.
The appellant filed First Appeal No.59 of 2016 and the respondent filed First Appeal No.68 of 2016.
The ill effect on child, due to discord between the parents with negative feeling against each other has natural effect, which hinders the childs numbermal development.
3.7 After aforesaid order dated 21.01.2019, the child was handed over to the School to companyplete her session.
All other issues between the parties shall be taken care subsequently.
Further, Aditi upon attaining the age of 12 years i.e. for the academic session 20192020 she shall be sent to a boarding school of repute where she qualifies and is able to get admission.
There has been matrimonial dispute between the parties since the year 2006.
The High Court disposed of the matter in terms of the settlement.
On a companysideration of all the facts and circumstances of this case and bearing in mind the paramount companysideration of the welfare of the child, we are of the opinion that the childs interest and welfare will be best served by removing her from the influence of home life and by directing that she should companytinue to remain in the Boarding School.
The Family Court further directed that for the academic session 20192020 she shall be sent to a boarding school of repute where she qualifies and is able to get admission.
Father along with an Advocate was to take the child.
V is decided accordingly.
List the matters after four weeks.
The respondent was allowed visitation right and also allowed custody of the child for half of each vacation of the school.
Thereafter, the matter was heard on 01.07.2019.
By order dated 03.05.2019 on the request of the mother she was permitted to have the custody of the child during the entire vacation with effect from 22.05.2019.
3.3 The respondent alleging obstruction by the appellant in his visiting rights filed an application seeking custody of the child, Aditi under Sections 7 and 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 at Bengaluru.
The Child Welfare Committee, Ranchi Jharkhand also interacted with the child.
Learned companynsel for the appellant has also referred to medical prescription dated 20.05.2019 of one Dr. Devi Prasad Rao, Child Specialist, Hospital Road, Ooty and one further prescription dated 07.06.2019 of Aditi from Zila Mansik Swasthaya Karyakaram, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhoom, Jharkhand.
Issue No.
First half of the vacation be in the care and custody of her father and second half be in the custody of the mother.
ASHOK BHUSHAN,J. Leave granted.
The appellant aggrieved by the judgment dated 26.04.2018 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi has companye up in these appeals.
However, the petitioner shall be entitled to the custody of the child for half of each vacation of the school where Aditi is or shall be studying and for the first half of vacation Aditi shall be in the care and custody of her father i.e. petitioner and for the second half of the vacation she shall be under the care and custody of her mother.
By the interim order passed by us on the companyclusion of the hearing we directed that the child should companytinue her study in the Boarding School.
The vacations referred to above are the Summer and Winter vacations in every school.
The custody in companyrse of vacation shall companytinue as before.
The entire companyt of such Boarding School shall be borne by the petitioner and once Aditi gets into the Boading School then the respondent shall have the right to visit her daughter as permitted by the School calendar but at the companyt of the petitioner and the petitioner shall pay such companyt which shall include the travelling airfare and other expenses in advance.
