CHINNU DARWIN Vs. FEIALOH FRANCIS P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed by a wife against her husband who are fighting before the Family Court, Ernakulam, for the custody of their only son aged 4' years, born on 12/8/2019. The husband filed Ext.P1 GOP No.2799/2021 before the Family Court, claiming permanent custody of the child. Along with the OP, he filed Ext.P2 application for interim custody of the child to which the wife filed Ext.P3 counter affidavit. As per Ext.P4 interim order dtd. 26/4/2022, the learned Family Court Judge permitted the husband to see the child at the premises of the Family Court on the first and last Sundays, between 3.00 to 4.00 pm till the disposal of the OP.

(2.) As per Ext.P5 application, the husband reported before the Family Court that the wife had willfully disobeyed Ext.P4 order and not permitting him to see the child and praying for taking appropriate action against the wife for violation of Ext.P4 order. The wife filed Ext.P6 counter affidavit against Ext.P5 application. After hearing both sides, the Family Court passed Ext.P7 order holding that the husband is entitled to have free interaction with the child during the period provided in Ext.P4 order. The Family Court further clarified that during the said period of interaction, if the child so prefers, the petitioner (husband) can take the child outside the Court premises, including the nearby park and directed the wife to comply with the above order in letter and spirit. Ext.P7 warns the wife of penal actions in case the order is not complied with. It was in the above context that the wife approached this Court praying for quashing Ext.P7 order, by invoking the power of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P7 order was passed by the Family Court without conducting necessary enquiry and without hearing the wife. He also claimed that the wife has not violated Ext.P4 order.