MERLIN THOMAS Vs. C S THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals are filed against the order of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor in O.P.(G&W) No.554/2000. The custody of a minor child, Arya Rose Mary, aged 6 years, is the subject matter of the Original Petition. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 11th February, 1995 at Cathedral Church, Changanacherry as per Christian rites. The child was born on 3-1-1996. The married life between the parties were happy for some time. The petitioner / husband is young and well educated and is working in the office of the Divisional Office, - L.I.C. of India, Kottayam. The respondent wife is also young and educated. Later, the marital relationship of the petitioner and the respondent became strained due to suspicious nature of the parties and even alleging mental disorder against each other. At last the respondent left the company of the petitioner and started living, with the child, in her parental house. Mediators including heads of religious institutions intervened and attempted to bring them together. All these attempts became futile. Later, the husband was forced to file O.P. No.528/2000 before the Family Court for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights and the Original Petition is pending. During the pendency of the said Original Petition, counselling was conducted and it was ordered that both of them may be subjected to psychiatric counselling and treatment. As the petitioner was not agreeable for this, he filed O.P.No. 13762/2000 before this Court and got a direction to the Family Court to consider and pass appropriate orders in O.P.(G&W) No.554/2000. Subsequently during the pendency of O.P.No.528/2000 the Family Court considered O.P.(G&W) No.554/2000 and allowed the Original Petition on the following directions:

(2.) It was alleged in the petition that the respondent / wife is adamant and her brothers and other family members are not looking after the affairs of the child. If the child is allowed to stay with the respondent, it will spoil her life as the child will not get better education or proper care. The respondent / wife left the company of the petitioner only because of the instigation of her brothers and the alleged mental disorder of the petitioner / husband is baseless. It is alleged that the wife being the last among the 11 children of her family and the paternal family of the wife is almost like a joint family, the child will not get proper care, even if it is allowed to stay with her mother. The Family Court found that the petitioner / father is well educated and well placed so as to look after the child. It is also found that, for the welfare and care of the child the custody of the child should have been given to the petitioner / father on certain conditions.

(3.) We have summoned couple as well as the child. We have ascertained the desire of the child and also we have attempted to minimise the animosity of the husband and the wife, taking note of pendency of O.P.No.528/2000, for a decree of restitution of conjugal right, before the Family Court. But we could not be successful. Hence, we consider only the custody of the child for the time being.