← Library
Bombay High CourtCPM/1/2022disposed of

Gourav Jaswal v. Gulnar Joshi

2023-10-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. S. Sonak4 pages

Suchitra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

CONTEMPT PETITION (MAIN) NO.1/2022 WITH MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1819/2023 (F) IN CONTEMPT PETITION (MAIN) NO.1/2022 GOURAV JASWAL ... APPLICANT

Versus

GULNAR JOSHI ... RESPONDENT Ms A. Agni, Senior Advocate with Ms A. Harihar, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr J. J. Mulgaonkar with Ms Asmita Tirodkar, Advocates for the Respondent.

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2175/2023 (F) IN CONTEMPT PETITION (MAIN) NO.1/2022 GULNAR JOSHI ... APPLICANT

Versus

GOURAV JASWAL ... RESPONDENT Mr J. J. Mulgaonkar with Ms Asmita Tirodkar, Advocates for the Applicant.

Ms A. Agni, Senior Advocate with Ms A. Harihar, Advocate for the Respondent.

CORAM:

M. S. SONAK, J.

DATED:

P.C.:

1.

Heard Ms A. Agni, learned Senior Advocate who appears along with Ms A. Harihar for the Petitioner and Mr J. J. Mulgaonkar who appears along with Ms Asmita Tirodkar for the Respondent.

2.

Te petitioner is present in person in the Court. Te respondent has joined the proceedings through video conferencing.

3.

Normally, in a Contempt Petition, there is no question of settlement because what is alleged is breach of the order of the Court. However, this is a case of dispute relating to custody and access. Te parties have arrived at a settlement insofar as access in Winter 2023 and Summer 2024 vacations are concerned. 4.

Learned counsel for the parties hand in the terms of settlement which are taken on record and marked as 'X' for identification.

5.

Te terms of settlement have been signed by both the advocates and the petitioner. Te respondent Ms Gulnar Joshi says that she has read these terms of settlement and she has no objection to the Court making an order based upon the same. Learned counsel for the respondent explains that Ms Joshi is presently in Canada and therefore it was not possible to obtain her signature on these terms.

6.

Te parties have worked out an arrangement with regard to parenting time and access to their son Iman Jaswal during the two distinct periods specified in the terms of settlement. 7.

On perusing the terms of settlement, I find that there is nothing contrary to the public policy set out therein. In fact, it is a good thing that the parties have reached this settlement keeping in mind the interest of Iman.

8.

Accordingly, the terms of settlement are accepted and there shall be an order in terms of the settlement marked as 'X' for the purpose of identification.

9.

Contempt Petition is disposed of basically because these were some disputes between the parents on the issue of parenting time and access to Iman. Tere is no contempt as such and now that the parties have resolved their disputes at least for the above two distinct periods, there is no good reason to keep this Contempt Petition pending.

10.

Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is disposed of inter alia by making an order in terms of the settlement marked 'X' for the purpose of identification.

11.

Te parties must abide by this order. Te parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

12.

Now that this Contempt Petition is disposed of, the Misc. Civil Applications filed therein from time to time if not specifically disposed of, are now hereby disposed of. M. S. SONAK, J.

SUCHITRA NANDAN SINGBAL Date: 2023.10.06 10:30:37 +05'30'

SUCHITRA NANDAN SINGBAL