IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942
OP (FC).No.445 OF 2020
OPGW 932/2018 OF FAMILY COURT,TRIVANDRUM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER
ARUN KUMAR R.
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.K.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, USHAS, MUKKOLAKKAL, NEDUMANGAD
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR
SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT
ANUJA V.R.
AGED 32 YEARS
D/O. A.VIJAYA KUMARI, TC 2/446, JYOTHIS, MUTHAYIMKONAM
LANE, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.SINDHU SANTHALINGAM
R1 BY ADV. SHRI.ABRAHAM K GEORGE
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(FC).445/2020
2
JUDGMENT
Dated : 6th January, 2021 K.Vinod Chandran, J.
1.Petitioner is before this Court seeking early disposal of the Guardian OP filed before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The Guardian OP itself is filed in the year 2018. The difficulty now expressed by the learned counsel is that since another Division Bench as per Ext.P6 directed that Family Court is at liberty to consider the claim for interim custody of the minor child with overnight stay only at the time of final disposal of the Original Petition, the Family Court is unable to consider the interim measure to that effect. It is also submitted that the compromise entered into between the parties to provide interaction with the child in every first and second Saturdays has not been complied with.
2.The learned counsel for the respondent submits that only due to the pandemic situation it was not complied with. As of now the father cannot be denied the company of the child merely for OP(FC).445/2020 3 that reason. Both the parents are at Thiruvananthapuram. Ext.P6 order also provides the company of the minor child to the father between 10.30 and to 3.00 pm on the scheduled dates within the court premises. This shall be complied with henceforth without fail. It was also directed that in the stipulated time father would be allowed to take out the child from the court premises.
3.It is made clear that the petitioner would take out the child from the court premises only for the purpose of his parents who are said to be residing at Nedumangadu, Thiruvananthapuram.
4.In any event, since the present interim arrangement is being continued, we direct the respondent to comply with the interim directions in Exts.P5 and P6 and the compromise entered into at Ext.P1. The learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for a direction to the Family Court to consider the overnight custody as an interim measure which, however, as of now, is not possible due to another Division Bench having held that it could be considered only at the disposal of the Original Petition. We are also not inclined to grant an early disposal OP(FC).445/2020 4 especially since the matter is of the year 2018 and there are many long pending matters before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
5.We dispose of this Original Petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a review of Ext.P6.
K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge M.R.ANITHA Judge Mrcs/6.1.
OP(FC).445/2020 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP(FC) NO.711/2017 DATED 20.12.17.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO.607/2018 IN OPFC 711/17 DATED 4.4.18.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF OP(G&W)NO.932/2018.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP(FC)NO.528/2018 DATED 28.9.18.
EXHIBIT P5 THE ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT IN IA.NO.1241/2018 IN OP(G&W)932/2018 DATED 4.1.19.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OP(FC)NO.131/2019 DATED 10.10.19.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NUMBER 1/2020.