RAVNEET SINGH Vs. PARUL TANDON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appears for the respondent and states that he was the counsel for the respondent before the learned Judge, Family Court and the vakalatnama filed by him in said proceedings entitles and authorises him to appear for the respondent in the appeal as well.

(2.) Impugned order disposes of an application filed by the respondent under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking to modify judgement and order dated November 18, 2009 and July 20, 2010. The impugned order notes the fact that when the warring couple sought divorce by mutual consent it was agreed between the couple that custody of Baby Mehak, a daughter born to the couple, would be with the father i.e. the appellant. Visitation rights were agreed to be given to the mother.

(3.) The decision notes the assertion by the wife that she gave consent for custody of her minor daughter to be retained by her husband on the assurance that the husband would continue to reside in Delhi so that she is able to access her daughter. It was asserted that belying the said assurance the husband shifted permanent residence to Mohali and thereby prevented easy and timely access for her to meet her daughter.