REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

R. SWAMINATHAN Appellant

V/S

SIVAGOWRI Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

KAILASH TALKIES V. STATE OF RAJESTHAN [REFERRED TO]
SABAD CH DEKA V. NAOMAI DEKA [REFERRED TO]
C.N.RAMACHANDRA V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
THUNGABHADRA INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
JIJABAI VITHALRAO GAJRE VS. PATHANKHAN [REFERRED TO]
ROSY JACOB VS. JACOB A CHAKRAMAKKAL [REFERRED TO]
MEERA BHANJA VS. NIRMALA KUMARI CHOUDHURY [REFERRED TO]
TAMILNADU ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. N RAJU REDDIAR [REFERRED TO]
PARSION DEVI VS. SUMITRI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
LILY THOMAS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH KHADRIA SMT MEERA AGARWALLA BANSAL VS. SHYAM SUNDER AGARWALLA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDER KUMAR VS. RAMBHAI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PAUL MANICKAM [REFERRED TO]
NIL RATAN KUNDU VS. ABHIJIT KUNDU [REFERRED TO]
AHMEDABAD ELECTRICITY COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
BAHADUR VS. BACHAI [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH KUMAR VS. NAGESHWAR PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN LAL BAGLA VS. BOARD OF REVENUE U P [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR HINDUSTAN PHOTO FILMS COMPANY LIMITED VS. H B VINOBHA [REFERRED TO]
K JAGANNATHAN VS. A M VASUDEVAN CHETTIAR [REFERRED TO]
SARAVANA PILLAI VS. A S MARIAPPAN [REFERRED TO]
B SURESH BABU VS. NITHYA [REFERRED TO]
S.O. KRISHNA AIYAR VS. S.V. NARAYANAN ALIAS S.V. DORAISWAMI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner/respondent/husband has filed this Review Application praying this court to review its order dated 20.01.2009 made in CRP.(PD).No,4091 of 2008.

(2.) EARLIER, the respondent/petitioner/wife has filed C.R.P.(PD).No,4091 of 2008 before this Court as against the order dated 14.11.2008 in I.A.No.1420 of 2008 in O.P. No,3556 of 2007 passed by the learned First Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai in directing the respondent/ wife to hand over the child to the petitioner/respondent/ husband on every Sunday at 9.00 a.m. at a common place agreed to by both and the petitioner/husband has been directed to hand over the child to the respondent/wife on the same day at 5.00 p.m. at the same place etc.

(3.) THE further pleas of the petitioner/husband are that the letter dated 09.2.2009 of the Headmistress of Vidyodaya Schools Society that the petitioner/husband has visited the school only during lunch break and that too only on the insistence of the Teacher and not as stated by the respondent/wife in her affidavit and indeed the parents have equal rights to the child/daughter and neither parties rights are superior to that of the other and that the plight of the petitioner has been deprived of the company of his precious daughter.

Click here to view full judgment.

R SWAMINATHAN Vs. SIVAGOWRI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address