Rahul Goyal v. Pratibha Goyal

O R D E R %

25.10.2016 CM No.39980/2016 Allowed. Mat.A.(F.C.) No.156/2016

¶1We have heard the appellant. He is the father. The issue concerns only 2 days' custody of Master Harshil Goyal. The custody of the child is with the appellant and vide impugned order dated October 22, 2016, for 2 days, including the festive day of Deepawali, custody (interim) has been entrusted to the mother.

¶2Appellant states that in the past the child used to spend Deepawali with him.

¶3We see no infirmity in the impugned order inasmuch as the festival of Deepawali is not only a religious but is even a cultural festival in India. This Court has seen across castes, creeds and religions people celebrating Deepawali. Mat.A.(F.C.) No.156/2016

¶4The grievance of the appellant that the mother of the child would force the child to sit for dhyan puja or meditation has been taken note of and redressed in the impugned order by recording respondent's undertaking not to subject to child to any meditation/dhyan/puja etc.

¶5Master Harshil Goyal, the child, is aged 8 years and surely would understand what he has to do.

¶6The appeal is dismissed in limine.

¶7No costs.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

PRATIBHA RANI, J. OCTOBER 25, 2016 mamta

Mat.A.(F.C.) No.156/2016 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 156/2016 RAHUL GOYAL ..... Appellant Represented by: Appellant in person versus PRATIBHA GOYAL ..... Respondent Represented by: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI