IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.74 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.74 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.74 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO.7998 OF 2008 Mrs.Leena Stephen Francis D’Mello ..Applicant Versus Stephen Francis Anthony D’Mello ..Respondent ---- Mrs.Manjula Rao i/by Shri Pradip Chavan for the applicant. Mr.R.T.Lalwani for the respondent. ---- Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 7th April, 2008. PC 1. The applicant has filed this Civil Application for condonation of 205 days delay in filing the appeal. 2. We have heard learned Counsel for the applicant as well as learned Counsel for the respondent. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has made out sufficient case for condonation of delay. Learned Counsel for the respondent strenuously opposed the condonation of delay. He submitted that the applicant has taken custody of the child Aaron from the respondent inspite of the order dated 6.6.2007 granting custody : 2 : of the child Aaron to the respondent. He submitted that the applicant is guilty of contempt and hence no relief should be granted to the applicant. 4. We are informed by Mrs.Rao, learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant has to produce the child Aaron in the Family Court at Bandra on 9.4.2008. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, delay needs to be condoned. However, condonation of delay will be subject to the applicant handing over custody of the child Aaron to the respondent. Learned Counsel for the applicant states that the child Aaron will be handed over to the respondent on 9.4.2008 in the Family Court at Bandra. Statement is accepted. We permit the applicant to retain the passport of the child Aaron with her. Learned Counsel for the respondent states that the child Aaron will be kept in Bombay and he will furnish the address where the child will be kept and the child Aaron shall not be taken out of Bombay until further orders of this Court. The respondent shall permit the applicant to meet the child Aaron on every alternate day at the Childrens Complex at Family Court, Bandra between 4.00 P.M. to 5.00 P.M. We make it clear that all contentions of both sides, including the contentions raised by the respondent in the affidavit in reply to the application for condonation of delay, are : 3 : kept open. We have already stated that the delay has been condoned in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also because the parties have agreed that this Court should not assign any reason for condonation of delay. Civil Application stands disposed off accordingly. (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) : 4 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO.7998 OF 2008 Mrs.Leena Stephen Francis D’Mello ..Appellant Versus Stephen Francis Anthony D’Mello ..Respondent ---- Mrs.Manjula Rao i/by Shri Pradip Chavan for the appellant. Mr.R.T.Lalwani for the respondent. ---- Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & Coram : Smt.Ranjana Desai & R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 7th April, 2008. PC 1. Matter to appear on board for admission on 21.4.2008. (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (Smt.Ranjana Desai,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J)