Vanju Kamal vs Anjalay V Das

Kerala High Court

Vanju Kamal vs Anjalay V Das on 22 May, 2024

Author: Raja Vijayaraghavan

Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan

OP (FC) No.332/2024                         1/4

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                          PRESENT
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
                                             &
                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
                 Wednesday, the 22nd day of May 2024 / 1st Jyaishta, 1946
                                OP (FC) NO. 332 OF 2024(R)
                 EP 17/2024 IN OP 1066/2017 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA

   PETITIONER/DECREE HOLDER/RESPONDENT:


           VANJU KAMAL, AGED 42 YEARS, VANJU KAMAL, S/O KAMALASANAN,
           MANJU VILLA, KADAKKAL .P.O.,KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA TALUK,
           PIN - 691 536.


   RESPONDENT/JUDGMENT DEBTOR/PETITIONER:


           ANJALAY V DAS, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O VIJAYDAS,
           RESIDING AT D2 APARTMENTS, SFS HOMES, SKYLINE PLAZA,
           VELLAYAMBALAM P O., SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
           NOW RESIDING AT PRA 351, PARUTHIKUNNU RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION,
           NEAR RADIO STATION, ENGINEERING COLLEGE P O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695106


        OP (Family Court) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
   stated in the affidavit filed along with the OP (FC) the High Court be
   pleased to direct the respondent to hand over the minor child Milaan to
   Petitioner/Decree Holder/Respondent and give custody of him forthwith to
   the Petitioner/Decree Holder/Respondent during this summer holidays as per
   the Clause 8 of the Ext P-2 Memorandum of agreement and Ext P-4 decree
   passed thereof by the Family Court, Kottarakkara, pending the final
   disposal of the above Original Petition.


        This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition
   and the affidavit filed in support of OP (FC) and upon hearing the
   arguments of M/S. BLAZE K.JOSE, NIKHIL SANJAY, TREESA ROSE & AIRINE JOBY,
   Advocates for the petitioner, the court passed the following:

                                                             P.T.O.
 OP (FC) No.332/2024                               2/4




                             RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V & P.M.MANOJ, JJ.
                                  -------------------------------------
                                     OP(FC) No.332 of 2024
                                 -------------------------------------------
                               Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024

                                                   ORDER

Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.

Issue notice to the respondent.

2. Sri. Blaze K. Jose, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, points out that the disputes between the parties were earlier referred to mediation and the parties had entered into Ext.P2 memorandum of settlement. Consequent to the same, O.P. No. 1066/2017 was disposed of as per Ext.P3 order and Ext.P4 decree. He contends that as per clause 7 to 11 of the settlement agreement, the parties had specifically arrived at specific terms insofar as the custody and visitation rights of the child is concerned. He contends that the petitioner has been diligently complying with the terms of the agreement.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that his request for grant of custody of the child in terms of the judgment and decree is not being complied with by the respondent. Though an execution petition was filed, the petitioner has not yet secured the custody of the child. Sri. Blaze points out that the school is scheduled to reopen on 03.06.2024 and unless the OP (FC) No.332/2024 3/4 OP(FC) No.332 of 2024 2 custody of the child is given to the petitioner, serious hardship would be caused. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel that the respondent is taking all measures to protract the matter and contends that there was no justification on the part of the Family Court in directing the parties to undergo counselling.

4. We find that the case stands posted on 23.05.2024 before the Family Court. In that view of the matter, we see no reason to intervene at this stage. We are certain that the Family Court shall look into the compromise as well as the decree and judgment passed accordingly and ensure that the directions are complied with in its letter and spirit.

Post on 27.05.2024.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE Sd/-

P.M.MANOJ JUDGE APM/22/05/2024 22-05-2024 /True Copy/ Deputy Registrar OP (FC) No.332/2024 4/4 APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 332/2024 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT OF MEDIATION DATED 18.07.2022 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA IN O.P. NO 1066 OF 2017 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P. NO 1066 OF 2017 DATED 22.09.2022 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.P. NO 1066 OF 2017 DATED 22.09.2022 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. 22-05-2024 /True Copy/ Deputy Registrar