Sindhu Bhuvanendran vs Joshy
2021 Latest Caselaw 11037 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                       &

           THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

   WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                             OP (FC).No.428 OF 2020

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.1447/2018 DATED 23-09-2020 OF
                      FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR


PETITIONER/S:

                SINDHU BHUVANENDRAN, AGED 38 YEARS
                D/O.BHUVANENDRAN, THOTTAHIL VEEDU,
                KARIKODU DESOM, MULAMTHURUTHY VILLAGE,
                KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.N.M.MADHU
                SRI.P.P.HARRIS
                SMT.C.S.RAJANI
                SHRI.SOHAIL AHAMMED HARRIS P.P.


RESPONDENT/S:

                JOSHY, S/O.A.S.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 41 YEARS,
                ANTHIKKADU VEETTIL, AYYANTHOLE POST,
                KANATTUKARA DESOM, POONKUNNAM VILLAGE,
                THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680003.
                MINORS- 1.YUKTHA JOSHY, AGED 14 YEARS,
                2.NIYA JOSHY, AGED 8 YEARS.


                BY   ADV.   SRI.K.PAUL KURIAKOSE
                BY   ADV.   SRI.ELDO KURIAKOSE
                BY   ADV.   SRI.ABRAHAM THOMAS (PUTHURAN)
                BY   ADV.   SRI.K.A.ANISH
                BY   ADV.   SRI.T.A.RAFEEK (CHERTHALA)

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.04.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC).No.428/2020                     2



                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7th day of April 2021

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The petitioner-mother filed this original

petition challenging the order passed by the

Family Court, Thrissur in an application for

interim custody of the children. The Family Court

refused to give interim custody of the children. We need not reiterate the facts referred to in the

impugned order.

2. We have, in fact, interacted with the

parties and the children. We are of the view that

in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in

Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan and Others

[(2020) 3 SCC 67], the parents who have been

denied custody should be given atleast contact

rights/visitation rights.

In such circumstances, we are of the view

that the petitioner-mother shall be allowed to

interact with the children on every first and

third Saturdays from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. through the

Family Court premises, Thrissur. The petitioner-

mother can also take the children outside the

Family Court, Thrissur, but not beyond Thrissur

Town. Further custody in the matter can only be

decided by the Family Court at the appropriate

stage. This arrangement will continue till the

disposal of the original petition pending before

the Family Court, Thrissur.

The original petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

ln

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION IN O.P.NO.1447/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 13.01.2020 IN I.A.NO.1/2020 IN O.P.NO.1447/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 08.09.2020 TO EXT.P2.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.09.2020 IN I.A.NO.1/2020 IN O.P.NO.1447/2018 PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE