JUDGEMENT
UDAY UMESH LALIT, J. -
(1.) Civil Appeal No.3559 of 2020 arose from Guardianship Petition filed by Perry Kansagra (hereinafter referred to as 'Perry'), father of minor
named Aditya Vikram Kansagra (hereinafter referred to as 'Aditya'),
under Sections 7, 8, 10, 11 of the Act [The Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890] before the District Court, Saket,
New Delhi. Perry is a person of Indian origin and Gujarati by descent.
His grandfather migrated to Kenya in 1935 and settled there. The family
has business interests in Kenya and United Kingdom. Perry holds dual
citizenship of Kenya as well as United Kingdom. Perry got married to
Smriti Madan Kansagra (hereinafter referred to as 'Smriti'), an Indian
citizen, on 29.07.2007 at New Delhi. Initially, the couple stayed at
Nairobi, Kenya but Smriti returned to India in 2009. The couple was
blessed with a son Aditya on 02.12.2009 at New Delhi. Except for a
brief period when the couple had gone to Kenya in 2012, Aditya always
stayed with Smriti in Delhi till the disposal of aforestated Civil Appeal
No.3559 of 2020.
(2.) On 26.5.2012, Civil Suit (O.S.) No.1604 of 2012 was filed by Smriti against Perry and his parents in the High Court [The High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] seeking following reliefs:
"(a) Pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, representatives, servants and/ or attorneys in perpetuity form in any manner removing the child either from the lawful custody of the Plaintiff No.2 or removing the child from Delhi; the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court or accessing the child in his School "Toddlers Train" at Sunder Nagar, New Delhi.
(b) Pass an order directing the Airport Authority of India, Immigration Authority of India, 'FRRO' to ensure compliance of prayer 'a' above.
(c) Pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, representatives, servants and/ or attorneys in perpetuity from meeting Plaintiff No.1 without the consent/ presence of Plaintiff No.2"
(3.) On 25.05.2012, an ex-parte ad-interim order was passed by the High Court restraining Perry from removing Aditya from the custody of
his mother. In this suit, I.A. No.12429 of 2012 was filed by Perry seeking
access to Aditya. Though Smriti was not averse to Perry's meeting Aditya,
it was submitted that the meetings be held only under her supervision.
By its order dated 13.07.2012, the High Court permitted Perry to meet
Aditya under the supervision of Smriti. Similar orders were passed from
time to time.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.