CITATION: Sharma v. Anand, 2015 ONSC 375
COURT FILE NO.: FC-14-1701
DATE: 2015/03/30
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
PARUL SHARMA
Applicant
– and –
ROHIT ANAND
Respondent
Self-Represented
Self-Represented
HEARD: November 14, 2014 (at Ottawa)
AMENDED REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The text of the original decision was corrected on March 30, 2015 and
the description of the correction is appended
Kane J.
[1] This matter proceeded as an uncontested trial. The respondent has not responded to this Application personally served upon him on July 29, 2014.
[2] The parties are from India. They married one another on December 2, 2003, and separated on September 23, 2011.
[3] The respondent departed Canada in 2011, returned to India and continues to reside there.
FATHER’S RELATIONSHIP TO CHILD
[4] The parties have one child, born January 23, 2011, who is now four years old. The father has not seen the child since September 23, 2011. The respondent has defaulted in his responsibility as parent of this child, including his obligation to provide child support.
[5] The respondent presented the applicant with a proposed separation agreement. In it, he states he shall have no financial obligation regarding the child. Such denial of responsibility is mirrored in his proposal as to access.
[6] The access proposed by the father would be conditional on:
(1) Whether the father comes to Canada in the future; and
(2) If the father visits Canada, he shall have the right to “meet and visit his son” for up to 2 days, unless he elects to limit such visit to “1 hour”.
[7] This child clearly is of no priority or importance to Rohit Anand.
[8] The applicant shall have sole custody of the child, Prnav Anand, born January 23, 2011.
[9] The respondent in the past has suggested he might remove or retain the child from the mother and this jurisdiction. The respondent shall have no right of access unless the terms thereof are fixed in advance by order of this court.
[10] The applicant shall have exclusive and sole authority to apply for and obtain any necessary treatment of and for the child, including a Canadian passport and travelling with the child outside of Canada, for which permission or consent of the respondent shall not be required.
CHILD SUPPORT
[11] Mr. Anand chose to file nothing in this proceeding, electing instead to force his wife to prove his income level. The evidence indicates he is employed at a management level in a company owned by a relative of his. He identifies himself to existing and potential customers as “General Manager, Projects and Sales, D.K. Plywood/Guntier Doors, Kitchens and Wardrobes”.
[12] On the evidence, the court imputes annual line 50 income to the respondent in an amount equivalent to $35,000 (CDN.) Given the evidence before the court and the more senior management position held by him, imputation of income at this level is conservative and unlikely excessive.
[13] Based on the above level of income, Mr. Anand was obliged to pay monthly child support on the first of each month to Ms. Sharma in the amount of $303 (CDN.), effective January 1, 2013, plus his share of s. 7 expenses as provided below.
[14] The respondent has an ongoing monthly child support obligation to the applicant of $303 per month, payable on the first of each month, commencing February 1, 2015.
[15] In correspondence in October, 2012 to the respondent, the applicant suggested Mr. Anand return to her and the child in Canada as well as her need of financial assistance from him. Arrears of child support to January 31, 2015, total therefore $7,575.
[16] Mr. Anand is further obligated to contribute towards s. 7 special expenses. Based on his above imputed annual income and that of the applicant at $99,000, the respondent is responsible to pay 26.2% of future reasonable s. 7 expenses. Those expenses are currently $900 per month for daycare and mediations and medical treatments for the child not covered by insurance. The respondent’s share thereof results in s. 7 arrears, between January 1, 2013, and January 31, 2015, totalling $5,900.
[17] Future s. 7 expense liability payable by the respondent, in addition to monthly child support, commencing February 1, 2015, shall be $236 per month payable on the first day each month.
[18] Payment to and collection of child support shall be through the Ontario Family Responsibility Office.
[19] The respondent shall within 30 days from this date provide the applicant with a copy of his full annual income tax returns for 2012 and 2013 and the India equivalent of that Government’s Notice of Assessment. By June 1st each year, the respondent shall provide the applicant with those same documents for the preceding calendar year, commencing June 1, 2015.
ONTARIO REAL PROPERTY
[20] The parties together own a home in Oshawa, Ontario. They together are the lessees of rental accommodation in Ottawa, Ontario where the applicant and the child now live.
[21] The applicant shall have exclusive possession of their Ottawa rental accommodation, consisting of Unit 405-1343 Meadowlands Dr., Ottawa ON., K2E 7E8.
[22] As between the parties, the applicant shall have exclusive possession of the residential property owned by them in Oshawa ON, being 532 Falconridge Dr., L1K 0C1.
[23] In relation to that Oshawa property, the applicant shall have the exclusive and right to rent, finance by mortgage or otherwise, renovate, repair, engage service providers for, deal with, list for sale and sell that property, without the permission or written consent of the respondent. Rent earned from that property is payable to the applicant only.
[24] Any documents related to the sale of the Oshawa property shall be signed by the applicant only who hereby has authority to execute such documents, if required, on behalf of the respondent.
[25] Upon any sale of the Oshawa property by the applicant, she is to send the respondent a copy of the statement of adjustments and deed or transfer of sale, within 30 days after the closing of such sale transaction. The applicant shall be entitled to all net proceeds of sale subject to the following.
[26] In the event of sale of the Oshawa property, the applicant shall retain and not expend one half of such net proceeds of sale (“Retained Proceeds Portion”) without further order of this court.
[27] In relation to the Retained Proceeds Portion, the applicant is entitled without further court order to:
(1) Deduct from the Retained Proceeds Portion, existing and future arrears of child support and s. 7 expenses owed by the respondent;
(2) Her costs as awarded herein; and
(3) Apply the Retained Proceeds Portion as a down payment towards her purchase of an Ontario residential property to be occupied by herself and the child.
SERVICE OF ORDERS
[28] These Reasons and any orders reflecting this decision shall be served on the respondent by the applicant sending a copy thereof by Priority Post to the respondent at 32, A-4, Sahridya Apartments, Rohtak Road, Pashcim Vihar, New Delhi – 110063, India.
DIVORCE
[29] The evidence establishes the parties have been separated and not resumed cohabitation in excess of one year. Upon filing the requisite documentation, the applicant shall be entitled to a divorce of her marriage to the respondent.
COST AWARD
[30] Based on the evidence as to legal costs incurred by the applicant to date, including mediation fees, legal fees, court fees and process service fees, the applicant’s fees in this proceeding total approximately $2,283.
[31] The applicant is awarded costs herein fixed at $1,400, including disbursements and HST.
Kane J.
Released: March 30, 2015
APPENDIX
March 30, 2015:
Paragraph [22]
523 Falconbridge Drive is amended to 532 Falconridge Drive, Oshawa, On L1K 0C1, being the correct address of the subject property.
CITATION: Sharma v. Anand, 2015 ONSC 375
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
PARUL SHARMA
Applicant
– and –
ROHIT ANAND
Respondent
AMENDED REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Kane J.
Released: March 30, 2015