Skip to main content

Best divorce case lawyer in Delhi

Recently, the Delhi High Court declined to suspend the interim visitation rights between a minor son and his mother and sister in an ongoing custody dispute. The Court underscored that continued interaction was necessary for nurturing family bonds and observed that suspending visitation at this stage would not serve the welfare of the children.

The case arises from a matrimonial dispute where custody of two children is contested between their parents. Earlier, the Family Court granted interim custody of both children to the mother, with visitation rights for the father. While the daughter has since chosen to reside with her mother, the younger son continues to stay with his father. The High Court had previously structured an arrangement to facilitate regular interaction between the children and their mother. The father moved an application seeking suspension of the visitation arrangement, alleging that the son felt uncomfortable and emotionally disturbed after interacting with his mother and sister.

On behalf of the father, it was urged that the child’s reluctance to meet his mother and sister demonstrated that the present visitation plan was not conducive to his welfare and should therefore be suspended. The application emphasised the child’s emotional unease following such interactions.

The Court, after interacting with both children, noted that the daughter, who is of mature age, expressed a clear desire to continue living with her mother. The son, being of tender years and impressionable, initially showed reluctance to meet his sister and mother. However, the Court stressed that such interactions were “crucial for developing a bond between them”.

Rejecting the father’s contention, the Court remarked, “An interaction of the son with his mother and sister is crucial for developing a bond between them. The bond between the siblings is required to be strengthened with continuous interaction, particularly when their parents are residing separately on account of marital discord".

The Court also noted that the Family Court had already recognised the mother’s entitlement to custody of both children, and that the son’s continued stay with the father was only due to interim orders.

Holding that suspension of visitation would not be in the best interest of the children, the Court directed that the interim visitation arrangement, which has been in operation for nearly a year, shall continue until the next hearing scheduled in October 2025. The father’s application was accordingly disposed of, with the Court reiterating that the welfare of the children remains paramount.

Case No.: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 255/2024

Coram: Justice Anil Kshetarpal, Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar

Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi


Best divorce lawyer

Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi 

Top divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi 

Maintenance case lawyer in karkarkardooma Court delhi

Domestic violence case lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi

Transfer petition case lawyer

NRI mutual consent divorce case lawyer


Matrimonial dispute case lawyer

Lawyer for interim maintenance case in karkarkardooma Court delhi

Best divorce case lawyer in East delhi


Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509


Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509

Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi
+91 85957 22509


Best Divorce lawyer

Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court

Best divorce lawyer in East delhi

Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court

Best divorce lawyer in Delhi

Best divorce case lawyer in Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in new delhi

Best divorce lawyer in Tis Hazari Court central Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in saket Court South Delhi

Best divorce lawyer in dwarka Court delhi


Best divorce lawyer in rohini Court

Best divorce lawyer in North Delhi

Mutual consent divorce lawyer

Best mutual divorce lawyer

Maintenance case lawyer

Domestic violence case lawyer

Contested divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi

Adultery divorce case lawyer in Delhi India

Transfer petition case lawyer


Child custody case lawyer

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number 8595722509

Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number 8595722509 Address :  137 J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar Delhi, 110092 Contact Number 8595722509 Phone Number 8595722509 Mobile Number 8595722509 Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number  8595722509 Address :  137 J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar Delhi, 110092 Contact Number  8595722509 Phone Number  8595722509 Mobile Number  8595722509 Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number  8595722509 Address :  137 J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar Delhi, 110092 Contact Number  8595722509 Phone Number  8595722509 Mobile Number  8595722509 Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number  8595722509 Address :  137 J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar Delhi, 110092 Contact Number  8595722509 Phone Number  8595722509 Mobile Number  8595722509 Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number  8595722509 Address :  137 J-Extension, Laxmi Nagar Delhi, 110092 Contact Number  8595722509 Phone Number  8595722509 Mobile Number  8595722509 Best ...

Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court delhi

Best Divorce lawyer Best divorce lawyer in karkardooma Court Best divorce lawyer in East delhi Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Best divorce lawyer in Delhi Best divorce case lawyer in Delhi Best divorce lawyer in new delhi Best divorce lawyer in Tis Hazari Court central Delhi Best divorce lawyer in saket Court South Delhi Best divorce lawyer in dwarka Court delhi Best divorce lawyer in rohini Court Best divorce lawyer in North Delhi Mutual consent divorce lawyer Best mutual divorce lawyer Maintenance case lawyer Domestic violence case lawyer

Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi

Case Details:- Bronson Barthol Dias v. Central Adoption Resource Authority, Writ Petition No. 3506 of 2025, decided on 7-4-2025 Bombay High Court: In a case wherein, the petitioners having two biological children suffering from disabilities, wanted to adopt a third normal child, but their application was rejected, the Division Bench of G.S. Kulkarni and Advait M. Sethna, JJ. opined that in complex and emotional mindset, the parents of the children with disabilities naturally would have an intense dedication, desire, and happiness to receive a normal child in adoption to balance their life and to have an experience to raise a normal child, which they were missing. The Court opined that it could never be the intention of the statutory mandate that a couple which already had disabled children could be barred from adopting a normal child. The Court thus directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioners’ application in accordance with law and by applying the power of relaxation under R...