(1.) The Petitioner and the Respondent were husband and wife. According to the Petitioner, their marriage was dissolved by way of pronouncing Talaq on 7.4.2010. In this Writ Petition, what he challenges is Ext.P4 common order passed by the Family Court, Ernakulam in I.A. Nos. 863/11 and 1448/11, in O.P. 1205/10.
(2.) I.A. 863/11 was filed by the Respondent, seeking interim custody of the child viz., Shahanamol, during school vacation. I.A. 1448/11 was filed by the Petitioner herein, praying that while orders are passed in the aforesaid I.A. filed by the Respondent, the preference of the child should also be ascertained. The interlocutory applications were considered and the Family Court passed Ext.P4 common order, allowing I.A. 863/11 and directing that interim custody of the child be given to the Respondent for 10 days from 20.4.2011 till 30.4.2011. In so far as I.A. 1448/11 is concerned, without assigning any reason, it was held that preference of the child need not be ascertained at this stage. Aggrieved by the above order, the Writ Petition is filed.
(3.) The child has completed her 10th Standard and has thus attained the age of discretion. Having regard to the above, we consider that preference of the child also ought to have been taken into account while orders, as sought for in I.A. 863/11, were passed. In view of the above, this Court, by order dated 29.4.2011, directed the Petitioner to produce the child before us. Accordingly, the child was produced before us and we interacted with the child in the Chambers. She has made it clear that her preference is to continue to live with the father for the present, as according to her, such stay with the father will be advantageous to her further studies, including coaching for professional courses. Now that such preference has been indicated by the child and as already mentioned, she has attained the age of discretion, we do not find any good reason to overrule her preference. Therefore, we are unable to uphold the view taken by the Family Court, in Ext.P4 order.