Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1059 (JHR)

GAUTAM MISHRA v. PREETI MISHRA

FA/224/2024 · 2026-02-02

Arun Kumar Rai, Sujit Narayan Prasad

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI First Appeal No. 224 of 2024 Gautam Mishra aged about 34 years S/o Gyanendranath Mishra, r/o village Rajpalli, P.O. & P.S.-Jamtara, District- Jamtara. …. --- Appellant Versus Preeti Mishra W/o Gautam Mishra, D/o Shivnath Jha, presently r/o village Ojha Jamua, P.O. & P.S.- Jasidih, District- Deoghar, r/o village- Palli, P.O. & P.S & Dist. Jamtara. …. --- Respondent --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD --- For the Appellant: Mr. Nityanand Prasad Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate --- 08 / 25.02.2026 The matter has been listed under the heading ‘to be mentioned’. 2. Mr. Nityanand Prasad Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that in pursuance to order dated 02.02.2026, Rs.30,00,000/- (Thirty Lakhs Rupees) will be transmitted in the bank account of the respondent-wife, out of which, a demand draft bearing no. ‘403445’ dated 19.02.2026 issued by Bank of Baroda, Jamtara of an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs Rupees) is ready and required to be handed over to the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife. 3. Mr. Pran Pranay, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife has accepted the same by giving due acknowledgement of receipt so as to hand over the said demand draft in favour of the respondent-wife. 4. Mr. Nityanand Prasad Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has further submitted that the rest of the amount, as per the direction passed by this Court, shall also be transmitted. It has been submitted that a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) is to be deposited in the name of the son, who has taken birth out of the wedlock but in absence of any account opened in the 2 name of the son under the guardianship of the mother, it would be difficult to deposit the said amount. 5. Upon this, Mr. Pran Pranay, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife has submitted that the account under the guardianship of the mother i.e. the respondent in the name of the minor son shall be opened and it will be communicated within a week. 6. Let it be done and be communicated to Mr. Nityanand Prasad Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-husband so that the said part of the order be complied with. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Date: 25.02.2026 RKM.