SH. PUSHPENDER vs SMT. SONIA CHOUDHARY

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 29.05.2025 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 212/2025 SH. PUSHPENDER .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. versus SMT. SONIA CHOUDHARY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Kalra, Mr. Ravindra Kumar and Mr. Bibhuti Bhushan Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral) CM APPL. 35032/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 212/2025 & CM APPL. 35031/2025 2. This appeal has been filed under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’), challenging the Order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court in Guardianship Petition, being G.P No. 88 of 2024, titled Smt. Sonia Choudhary v. Sh. Pushpender, whereby the learned Family Court records that as the daughter of the parties wants to stay with the appellant/husband, therefore, the custody of the daughter was directed to be handed over to the appellant/husband, with the consent Signature Not Verified Signed By:PALLAVIMAT.APP.(F.C.) 212/2025 Page 1 of 3 VERMA Signing Date:31.05.2025 16:12:30 of the respondent herein/wife. As far as the son of the parties is concerned, the interim custody was allowed to be retained with the mother, that is, the respondent herein. 3. With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the appeal is being considered for final disposal at this stage itself. 4. The grievance of the appellant/husband is that while the wishes of the daughter were considered, and then with the consent of the respondent/wife, the interim custody of the daughter was handed over to the appellant/husband, the learned Family Court did not make any such effort to interact with the son before grantin