SHWETAL v. ABHIJEET
Case at a glance
- Bench
- NANDESH S DESHPANDE, DISTRICT
Provisions considered
Judgment
I do not find any perversity in the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention placed reliance on the judgment in case of Mausami Dilipkumar Bhatt vs. Maunang Lalitkumar Gor, 2025SCC OnLine Guj 894 to support his submission. Heparticularly relies on paragraph 25 of the said judgment and submits that an identical situation arose before the Gujarat High Court wherein it is observed that no application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Ward Actwould be maintainable.
I am hardly impressed by the contention canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in as much as admittedly the order impugned in the petition is an interim order where maintainability of the petition or otherwise could not be dealt with, at least by me in this petition while exercising supervisory jurisdiction.
The writ petition is liable to be rejected. It is thus rejected. No order as to costs. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE,J.) Asmita
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.