ANINDITA KAR Vs. SUDIP NATH CHOUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 19.08.2015 passed on I.A.No.5 in M.C.No.3420/2013 at Annexure -E to the petition. In that light, the petitioner is seeking that the application in I.A.No.5 in M.C.No.3420/2013 be allowed.

(2.) The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. Due to certain difference in their marital life, they are residing separately. The petition in M.C.No.3420/2013 is instituted by the petitioner -wife seeking dissolution of the marriage. In the pending petition, she has filed an application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act in I.A.No.5 seeking that a direction be issued to the respondent to hand over the custody of their child Ryan. The application was objected to by the respondent. The Court below after taking note of the rival contentions has partly allowed the application. Though the prayer for handing over the custody of the child is rejected, the visitation right is granted to the petitioner on the first and fourth Saturday at Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, between 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the said order insofar as rejecting the custody of the child, is before this Court in this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the order would contend that the Court below while considering the application has proceeded at a tangent and in that light has arrived at a wrong conclusion. It is pointed out that though the Court below accepts the fact that the petitioner is the biological mother of the child, has wrongly arrived at the conclusion that the custody cannot be granted due to the delay in filing the application, there being time lapse and there is no familiarity between the mother and the child. It is contended that such conclusion is not justified.