REMYA.R. Vs. AKHILESH.S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking the jurisdiction vested on this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner herein, who is the respondent before the Family Court, Pathanamthitta in O.P.No.840/2018, is challenging an order passed by that court on 14.11.2018 in I.A.No.1342/2018.

(2.) The parties are wife and husband, respectively, who are living separated since July 2018, due to matrimonial disputes. The dispute in the case before the Family Court is with respect to custody of the minor child. The respondent/husband filed O.P.No.840/2018 before the Family Court seeking permanent custody of the child. He had also filed I.A.No.1342/2018 seeking interim custody of the child, pending disposal of the original petition. Since the date of separation of the spouses, the child is in the custody of the petitioner/mother. The court below found that, after filing of the case before the Family Court, the petitioner had removed the ward to a school at Bangalore, on the basis that she got a job there. The petitioner had produced documents before the court below evidencing admission of the child at a school at Bangalore. She had also produced documents showing that she got the job as a 'Medical Coder Trainee' in a company at Bangalore. The court below found that, the respondent/husband is suffering from some serious illness which had affected his mental and physical status. Noticing that the child in question is very affectionate to the respondent herein, it was observed by the court below that, the paramount welfare and interest of the child would be served only if the child is re-admitted to the school at Thumpamon, where she was studying in the UKG class. The court below had ordered interim custody of the child to the respondent on every alternate Saturdays till the succeeding Sundays. It is further ordered that the respondent can also visit the child at the school, if he wishes so, on any school days.

(3.) The petitioner is challenging the order impugned, mainly to the extent it directed the re-admission of the child to the school at Thumpamon. Contention raised is that, the order is erroneous to the extent it insist upon the petitioner to quit her jot at Bangalore and to come back to Kerala in order to put the child back in the school at Thumpamon, only for the sake of facilitating the respondent to have visitation of the child on the school days also. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner conceded that, she is ready and willing to give interim custody of the child on every second Saturdays till the succeeding Sundays, as directed by the Family Court.