Item No.8
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
F.C.A.No.1 OF 2016
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/father
assailing the judgment dated 11.06.2015 passed by the learned Family
Court, rejecting a petition filed by him for seeking custody of the
minor son of the parties (respondent No.2), in the care and custody of
the respondent No.1/mother, on the ground that the respondent No.1, who is the natural mother and is taking good care of him and also on the ground that the appellant had already contracted another marriage and is living with his second wife.
2. The records reveal that by an interim order passed on 14.10.2016, visitation rights were granted to the appellant/father during the pendency of the appeal and he was permitted to spend two hours with the respondent No.2/son on every third Saturday of the month from 10:00 A.M to 12:00 Noon in the office of District Legal Services Authority, City Civil Court premises, Hyderabad. It was also clarified that in the event the third Saturday falls on a holiday, the appellant/father would be entitled to the aforesaid visitation rights on the fourth Saturday of the same month.
3. On the first call, learned counsel for the appellant/father had fairly stated that his client is no longer interested in pressing for the F.C.A.No.1 of 2016 Page 1 of 3 custody of the minor child, but had pointed out that during the pandemic for the past one year, he did not have physical access to the child, as was ordered on 14.10.2016.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/mother states that prior to the pandemic setting in, regular visitation rights in respect of the minor child were being afforded to the appellant/father in terms of the order dated 14.10.2016. However, during the pandemic, which hit the country in March, 2020, the appellant/father had not contacted the respondent No.1/mother for claiming any virtual visitation rights. She states that her client is still open to the same.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we had passed over the matter to enable both sides to state if they would be willing for the order dated 14.10.2016 to be made absolute, till the respondent No.2 attains majority.
6. On pass over, learned counsel for the appellant/father states that he has obtained instructions from his client to the effect that he is agreeable to the interim order dated 14.10.2016 being made absolute. He however requests that till the pandemic continues, the appellant/father may be permitted visitation rights in respect of the minor child through virtual mode. Learned counsel for the respondents is agreeable to the same.
7. Accordingly, it is agreed that till the situation normalizes, the appellant/father shall have access to the minor child through virtual mode on every third Saturday of the month starting from 05.06.2021 F.C.A.No.1 of 2016 Page 2 of 3 from 10:00 A.M., to 11:00 A.M. Thereafter, on the situation normalizing, the appellant/father shall be permitted visitation rights to the respondent No.2 in terms of the order dated 14.10.2016, which is made absolute.
8. The present appeal is disposed of along with the pending applications, if any, on the above terms.
_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ ______________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 01.06.2021 Lrkm/Pln F.C.A.No.1 of 2016 Page 3 of 3