IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 255 FAO-4378-2024 Date of Decision: 27.05.2025 Gurpreet Singh Sodhi ....Appellant Versus Ramandeep Kaur ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI ---- Present: Mr. Deepak Verma, Advocate for the appellant. **** Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral) 1. The appellant assails the correctness of order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Panchkula, while declining his request for deposing through video conferencing facility, as he is residing in America. 2. Learned counsel representing the appellant submits that the Family Court has erred in making observation, which is neither borne from the record of the case nor necessary for adjudication of the application. 3. This Court has considered the submissions. It is evident that Rules for examining the witnesses/party through video conferencing facility have been notified. Efforts should be made to encourage the parties to appear through video conferencing facility instead of their physical appearance in the Court unless found necessary. In this case, the Court has dismissed the application on the ground that the appellant went abroad on the basis of VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.05.29 20:01 I attest to the accuracy of this order/judgment PHHC FAO-4378-2024 -2- misrepresentation. In the opinion of the Court, it was not appropriate for the Family Court to decline the request particularly in view of assertions made by the appellant to the effect that he was granted political asylum in United States and thereafter, he continues to reside there after getting permanent residency. Hence, the impugned order is set aside. The Family Court is directed to permit the appellant to depose through video conferencing facility, as per the notified Rules. 4. Disposed of. (ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE (VIKAS SURI) May 27, 2025 JUDGE Varinder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.05.29 20:01 I attest to the accuracy of this order/judgment PHHC