9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (2) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ho appeared for the Respondent yesterday. In the course of the hearing, on two or three occasions Mr. Parekh, who appeared for the Respondent, made an offer of settlement to the petitioner. After considering these offers the petitioner rejected them. Ultimately after the arguments were over while I was about to dictate my judgment Mr. Trivedi for the petitioner stated that his client desired to accept the offer which had been made earlier by Mr. Parekh. The parties thereafter took some time and reduced the consent terms to writing in Court. Both the petitioner and the Respondent were present in Court throughout. After the consent terms were reduced to writing and before the parties or their advocates put their signatures on the consent term ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for the benefit of the minor. In this connection he has drawn my attention to Order 23, Rule 3 and Order 32 and Rule 7 Civil P. C. Order 32 Rule 7 states that in case where a minor is a party to the suit no next friend or guardian can, without the leave of the Court, expressly recorded in the proceedings, enter into any agreement or compromise on behalf of a minor. According to Mr. Thakkar, the same principle should apply in a case where a minor is affected though he may not he a party to the suit. In the absence of an express sanction of the Court to the compromise, the present compromise is not a lawful compromise under Order 23, Rule 3 and hence it should be set aside. There is some substance in what Mr. Thakkar has argued. In a case w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atus of a party such as probate proceedings or matrimonial proceedings the Court cannot go by the wishes of the parties. It must independently apply its mind to the points at issue. He has argued that the present order being an order in rem, the same principle should apply. I do not consider an order for custody as an order in rem. It is an order which is subject to revision and alterations if circumstances affecting the parties change. It does not affect the status either of the parties or of the minor. Hence it is perfectly open to the parties to arrive at consent arrangements regarding custody of their minor children. In fact this is a well-established practice. 6. As the present case bears somewhat unusual aspects, I had seen the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
