Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9729 (BOM)

VINOD BABRUWAN HULSURE v. UDHAVRAO PANDURANG GAMBHIRE

WP/6485/2023 · 2026-09-15

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP.6485.2022.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6485 OF 2023 Vinod Babruwan Hulsure VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through The District Collector And Another ---- Mr.Hemant Surve, Advocate for petitioner Mr.Pravin G. Patil, Advocate for respondent ---- CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2026 ORDER :- Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 17.10.2022, passed by the Family Court, Latur on an application Exh.51 in Petition No.D-6 of 2021, the petitioner/father of minor daughter is before this court. 2. The petitioner filed application (Exh.51) with the following prayer :- (A) By allowing the present application, the interim custody of the minor daughter namely Mansa d/o Vinod Hulsure, may kindly be ordered to given to the applicant Vinod Babruwahan Hulsure from 15.10.2022 till 05.11.2022 in order to have Diwali festivity in the company and association of the natural father of the minor; 2026:BHC-AUG:42813 2 WP.6485.2022 3. Vide the impugned order dated 17.10.2022, the trial court rejected the prayer for temporary custody but granted the visitation right on 31.10.2022 and 01.11.2022 between 03.00 p.m. and 05.00 a.m. in the Children’s Complex. Suffice it to note, the visitation right was in addition to the consent terms at Exh.23. 4. Present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayers:- B. By finding fault with the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court, being Family Court, Latur in petition No. D6 / 2021 passed below Exh. 51 decided on 17.10.2022, the said order may kindly be ordered to be upset on merits and it be further held and declared that the observations in the said order would not affect the merits of the matter, during pendency of the said custody petition; C. It be furthered held and declared that the petitioner is entitled to seek for the temporary custody of the minor daughter during her vacations, pending hearing and final decision of the custody proceeding before the trial Court i.e. Petition No. D-6/2021; D. If felt appropriate and possible, the learned trial Court be directed to expedite the custody petition and to adjudge the same within a time bound manner 3 WP.6485.2022 5. I have heard both sides extensively. Obviously, the period for which the temporary custody was sought under application Exh.51 is now over. So also, the period for which the visitation right was granted is also over. 6. At this juncture and on this backdrop, Mr.Surve, learned advocate for the petitioner prays for grant of prayer clauses (C) and (D) in this Writ Petition. 7. In have been apprised by Mr.Surve, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Patil, learned advocate for the respondent, that the impugned order as could been is passed four years back. 8. In view of the above and considering the nature of the subject-matter, I deem it appropriate to relegate the matter back for fresh consideration by the Family Court. In the fitness of circumstances, I think it appropriate that the minor daughter be also given an opportunity to offer her consent for arrangement of temporary custody considering her age and the controversy among the parties. 4 WP.6485.2022 9. Hence, the following order:- (A) The Writ Petition stands partly allowed. The impugned order dated 17.10.2022, passed by Family Court, Latur, on an application Exh.51 in Petition No.D-6 of 2021 is quashed and set aside. The matter is relegated back to the Family Court for fresh consideration. (B) The Family Court shall decide the application Exh.51 afresh within a period of three months from today, purely on its own merit. (C) For better adjudication of the application and in view of the observations made by this court (supra), the Family Court may arrange presence of the minor daughter to put up her opinion or consent as regards the request made by the petitioner/father in his application. Considering the age of the minor daughter, her consent for temporary custody would be a sine qua non. (D) The parties are at consensus that they will appear before the Family Court on 03.10.2026. [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] ……….. KBP