S ROHINI Vs. M RAJAVEL MOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellant questioning the validity and/or correctness of the order dated 24.10.2016 passed in I.A. No. 1501 of 2016 in O.P. No. 1507 of 2014 on the file of Principal Family Court, Chennai. The said application was filed by the appellant to modify the Judgment and Decree dated 09.12.2014 passed by the Court below in O.P. No. 1507 of 2014, which was filed under Section 13-B of The Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. The Court below refused to entertain the application for modification and dismissed it which gave rise to the filing of the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by the appellant.

(2.) The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised on 20.01.2002 at Indira Nagar Women Association Hall, Indira Nagar, Chennai. After the marriage, the appellant and the respondent resided together at the residence of the respondent at No.C-2, Lakshmi Apartments, No.25, 4th Main Road, Kasturibai Nagar, Chennai 600 020. Due to the wedlock between the appellant and the respondent, a male child was born to them on 12.07.2006. Since matrimonial disputes cropped up between the appellant and the respondent, they were living separately from 12.01.2013. In order to patch up the differences between them, several mediations had taken place but it was of no avail. Ultimately, the appellant and the respondent decided to dissolve the marriage solemnised between them by mutual consent. Accordingly, the appellant and the respondent have filed OP No. 1507 of 2014 before the Family Court, Chennai under Section 13-B of The Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court, by accepting the terms and conditions on which the appellant and the respondent want to dissolve their marriage, has passed the Decree and Judgment dated 09.12.2014 dissolving the marriage solemnised between the appellant and the respondent by mutual consent. As per the Judgment passed by the Family Court, based on the agreement entered into between the parties, the respondent agreed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- by 5th of every calender month to the appellant and the minor son towards their monthly maintenance. The respondent also agreed to pay the school fee of the minor son as and when it was required to be paid. Further, it was agreed that the custody of the minor son shall vest with the appellant and that the respondent shall have unlimited visitation rights of the minor child and the timing for such visit shall be mutually fixed between the appellant and the respondent.

(3.) According to the appellant, in the decree and Judgment dated 09.12.2014 in HMOP No. 1507 of 2014, no modalities were made with regard to the manner in which the payment was to be made or the specific period during which the respondent can visit the minor child. Further, the sum of Rs.25,000/- which the respondent agreed to pay towards monthly maintenance for the appellant and the minor son is insufficient and inadequate to meet the present day cost of living and expenses and therefore it has to be enhanced to Rs.50,000/- per month. As regards the visitation rights, it is submitted that the respondent started demanding the custody of the minor child at odd hours at his whims and fancies. The respondent is seeking the custody during school examination of the minor son and thereby his studies are affected. In such circumstances, the appellant has filed the application seeking to modify the conditions imposed in the order dated 09.12.2014 in HMOP No. 1507 of 2014 in so fr as it relates to the visitation rights of the minor. In the application in I.A. No. 1501 of 2018, the appellant prayed for the following relief:-