Sri D. S v. G. Nagaraju

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order dated 13'03 2025 in lA No 259 of 2025 in GWOP No. 43 of 2025 on the file of the Court of the Judge' I Additional Family Court cum XIV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad' pending disposal of the CRP lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 1s'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to vacate the interim suspension order granted on 2gtOSt2O25 passed in 1 .A. No. 1 of 2025 in c.R.P. No.'r 736 oF 2o2s and dismiss the above civir Revision petition with exemplary costs. CRP NO: 1737 0F 2025 Petition under Articre 227 0f rhe constitution of rndia aggrieved by the No. 43 of 2025 on the file Court-cum-XlV Additional order dated 13.03 2025 in I.A. No. 260 of 2025 in O.p of the Court of the Judge, I Additional Family Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Between: Teki Venkata Prasad S/o. Late T.V.V Satyanarayana, Aged about 37 years, Occ. Pvt Employee, permanent R/o. 5_g6, Jajapathi Nagaram, Kakinada Diskict, Andhra pradesh _ 533431 presenfly l.""lUlng at 4_97 t1t4 Sujatha Nagar, Visakhapatnam, Andhra pradesh_ 53005j ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT AND Nnelli Supriya Pathak, Wo. Venkata prasad Teki, Aged. 39 years, Occ. pvt Employee, Presenfly R/o. H. No. 5_5_275, Nampally, Near Nampally Dargah, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana _ 500001. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PETITIONER IA NO: 1 oF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operation of the order dated: .13.03.2025 in rA No.260 0f 2025 in GWoP No 43 of 2024 on the fire of the court of the Judge, r Additionar Famiry Court-cum-XlV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the CRp lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim suspension order granted on Dt. 2810512025 passed in l.A. No. 1 of 2025 in C.R.P. No.1737 OF 2025 and dismiss the above Civil Revision Petition with exemplary costs Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri D. S. V. G. Nagaraju Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Ashwin representing Sri P. Srihari The Court made the following: COMMON OROER HON'BLE SRI JU STICE A BHINAN D KUMA R STIAVILI CryIL RE:IIISIO N PETITION No,1736 and 173 7 of2025 COMMON ORDER: Aggrieved by the interlocutory orders, dated 13.O3.2025 passed in I.A.Nos.259 and 26rJ of 2025 in O.S No.43 of 2025 by the I Additional Family Court_ r:um- XIV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Ijvderabad, both the Civil Revision petitions are filed.

2. Heard Sri D.S.V.G. Nagaraju, learnecl counsel appcarlng Sn Ashwin, learned counsel representing Sri I). Srihari, learned counsel appearing for the rc spondent. petitioner

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended th:,rt the respondent is the wife of the petitioner and strc has hlect O.p.No.43 of 2025 seeking custody of two mirror children who are aged about ten years ancl three vcerrs and in the said O.p., she has also filed two I.As viz., I.A.Nos.259 and 260 of 2025 seeking interim custody of said two minor children. The trial Court has 2 allowed both the I.As on I3.O3.2O25 and handed over interim custody of the minor child, who is aged about thr'ee years and gralted visitation rights in respect of the minor child, who is aged about 10 years, to the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner had further contended that without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without taking into account the welfare of the minor children, the trial Court has passed ex parte interim orders da1_ed

13.03.2025 granting interim custody and visitation rights in respect of the minor children to the respondent. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in these revisions by setting aside the interlocutory orders dated 13.03.2025 passed by the trial Court and remit the matter to the trial Court so as to enable Lhe trial Court to hear the petitioner before passing any interlocutory orders.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent had contended that it is the mother, who -v l T should get the custody of the minor children less than lO years, and the trial Court has rightly granted interim custody of minor child, who is aged about three years, and visitation rights in respect of the child, who is aged about ten years to the respondent. Therefore, there are no merits in the revisions and the same are liable to be dismissed.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by thc learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the vicw that admittedly, the minor children are residing u,ith the petitioner. Without hearing the petitioner, the trial Court has passed ex parte interlocutory orders by granting curstody of three years old minor child and visitation rights in respect of ten years old minor chitd to the respondent. Before passing an adverse intcrlocutory order, the trial Court ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner, as the minor children intcrest is of paramount importance.

7. Therelbre, both the Civil Revision petitions are allowed by setting aside the interlocutory orders dated ..''\*''.-=t- 4

13.03.2025 passed by the trial Court in I.A.Nos.259 and 260 of 2025 in O.P.No.43 of 2025 and the I.As are remitted to the trial Court. The trial Court is directcd to dispose of the said IAs, after giving an opportunity to both the parties and without being influenced by aly of the observations made by this Court. No costs As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, sha-ll stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL PUry REGISTRAR ISECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judge, I Additional Family Court-cum-XlV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. One CC to Sri D. S. V. G. Nagaraju, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI P. Srihari Advocate [OPUC] 4 Two CD Copies VH/gh ,!- HIGH COURT DATED: 1810712025 COMMON ORDER oR lHE Q 4 1{ rus 2U5 '1c o li) CRP.No.1736 and 1737 of ZO2S lr: ';, n4y1-,,.^ n--.;/' ALLOWING BOTH CRp's / /,b, /4/s