Keya Makhal v. David James

FMAT 207 of 2016 34.

sg 22-11-2021 With CAN 1 2016 (old CAN 2359 of 2016) Ct. 8 With CAN 2 2016 (old CAN 2360 of 2016) Keya Makhal

Versus

David James (Through Video Conference) Mrs. Juin Dutta Chkraborty, Adv.

...for the appellant Mr. Debjit Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. S. Chatterjee, Adv.

Mr. D. Ganguly, ADv.

Ms. K. Bhattacharya, Adv.

...for the respondent We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It appears that during the pendency of this matter, the child has almost attained majority. However, the child is presently in the custody of the father. The appellant has remarried in the meantime and a child was born out of the second marriage. There has been a considerable change in the circumstances during the pendency of this appeal, which according to us, has now made this appeal infructuous.

In view thereof, the appeal and the applications stand dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)