FATHIMATH SUHARA M. Vs. MUHAMMED EARATTAYIL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the parties are common in both these cases and since the orders under challenge were issued by the Family Court in the very same original petition, both the above cases were considered together and disposed of through this common judgment.

(2.) Issue arises with respect to interim orders passed by the Family Court, Tirur in O.P. No. 155/2015, which is filed under the Guardian and Wards Act, seeking custody of a minor child, namely Hana Sherin, who is now aged 7 years. Case before the Family Court was instituted by the paternal grandparents of the minor child, who are respondents 1 and 2 in O.P.(FC) No. 330 of 2015. The petitioner herein as well as the third respondent in O.P. No. 330 of 2015 are the respondents before the court below. The petitioner herein is the mother of the minor child. The third respondent in O.P. No. 330 of 2015 is her 2nd husband. Father of the minor child is no more.

(3.) In the original petition filed before the Family Court, the grandparents have sought permanent custody of the minor child. During pendency of the original petition, they filed I.A. No. 527 of 2015 seeking interim custody of the child on all weekends and during the holidays of Id -Ul -Fitr, Bakrid, Onam, X'mas and summer holidays. The Family Court passed Ext. P4 order (produced in O.P.330/15) on 6.5.2015 permitting the grandparents to visit the minor child at the residence of the petitioner herein, on all Sundays between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. for having acquaintance with the minor child. Being not satisfied with the said order, the grandparents have approached this Court in O.P.(FC) No. 213 of 2015. The said original petition was disposed of through Ext. P1 judgment (produced in O.P. No. 453/15). This court found that the court below was not justified in restricting the visitorial right only for two hours. It was noticed that the minor child was living in the house of the grandparents till the death of her father. Therefore, observing that the grandparents may not have any difficulty to have acquaintance with the child, the arrangement was modified. The petitioner herein was directed to give custody of the minor child to the grandparents on all Sundays between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. The grandparents were permitted to take the child from the house of the petitioner and to return the child within the time stipulated as above. In Ext. P1 judgment, this Court observed that, "if any further modification is required in this matter regarding custody of the child, petitioners are at liberty to move the Family Court as and when necessity arises, even asking for interim custody during vacation and other holidays".