1 2026:HHC:36909 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No. 416 of 2026 Decided on: 31.8.2026 Saurav Rattan … Petitioner Versus Cherry Mohil & ors. …Respondents _____________________________ ______________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ___________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Ms. Diksha Bharti, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) The petitioner has filed the present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 18.7.2026, passed by the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirmaur District at Nahan, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Family Court’), in CMA No. 598-N/6 of 2026, filed in Guardian Petition No. 8 of 2025, titled as, ‘Saurav Rattan versus Cherry Mohil’. 2 2026:HHC:36909 2. The learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, without deciding the main application. With the consent of the parties, the present petition is allowed by setting aside the order dated 18.7.2026 and the learned Family Court is requested to decide the application under Section 151 CPC, filed by respondent No. 1, for modification of order dated 28.10.2025, regarding interim visiting rights, granted in Application No. 997-N/6 of 2025. 3. In view of submissions made by learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the respondents, the petitioner is directed to file reply to the aforesaid application, within a period of two weeks from today, i.e. on 21.9.2026, on which date, the parties, through their respective counsel, are directed to appear before the learned Family Court. The learned Family Court is requested to decide the same, on or before 31.10.2026 and not to grant unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in this case. 5. With these observations, the present petition is allowed. 3 2026:HHC:36909 7. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present application. 8. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. (Virender Singh) 31.8.2026 Judge Kalpana