ALTHEA VERNA WASDELL Vs. BRENDON ALFRED WASDELL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these cases, the petitioner has called in question the validity of the order on I.A. Nos. 3 and 5 dated 16.4.2012 in M.C. No. 3589/2011 on the file of the 4th Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. The petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of her marriage with the respondent in M.C. No. 3589/2011 before the Court below. In the said case, she filed I.A. No. 3 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay Rs. 10,000/ -per month to each of their children as interim maintenance. The respondent filed an application I.A. No. 5 seeking interim custody of the minor child Faye or in the alternative for grant of visitation rights every week end and half the summer, winter and Christmas vacation. The Court below has passed an order granting interim maintenance of Rs. 4,250/- p.m. towards the 2nd daughter Faye till she attains majority. The Court below has granted visitation rights of the 2nd daughter to the respondent every Saturday at the Court premises from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. except on the 2nd Saturday.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent is well placed in life. He is drawing more than Rs. 50,000/- per month. Their 1st daughter is studying in Mount Carmel College, Bangalore. The petitioner has to maintain the 1st daughter and also her never bothered to take care of the children at any point of time. The 2nd daughter is not willing to meet the respondent. Learned Counsel has taken me through educational expenses. The 2nd daughter is also going to school. She is 10 years old. Therefore, the Court below, ought to have granted at least Rs. 10,000/ - per month towards her interim maintenance.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner is also employed. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case the Court below has granted interim maintenance of Rs. 4,250/- per month to the 2nd child which is just and reasonable. It is further argued that the Court below has only granted visitation rights in the Court premises on every Saturday between 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. except on 2nd Saturday. The petitioner has failed to obey the said order. It is argued that in the interest and welfare of the minor child, the respondent should be granted visitation rights. She prays for dismissal of the writ petitions.