Nagaraj vs Leena
2021 Latest Caselaw 1517 Ker

                                  1
MFA.No.112 OF 2008

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                  &

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

   THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 24TH POUSHA, 1942

                          MFA.No.112 OF 2008

   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN I.A 3/2008 IN OP 1496/2006 OF
                     FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD


APPELLANT/S:

                NAGARAJ, AGED 30 YEARS , S/O.GOPALAN
                MELETTIL VEEDU, ALANGAD.P.O, KADMAPAZHIPURAM,,
                OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD.

                BY ADV. SMT.SANDHYA RAJU

RESPONDENT/S:

                LEENA, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN
                CHAITANYA AMBALLAVATTAM, EZHAKKAD, MUNDUR,,
                PALAKKAD.

                R1 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY

     THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-01-
2021, THE COURT ON 14-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    2
MFA.No.112 OF 2008




           A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & C.S.DIAS, JJ.
              ======================
                     MFA No.112 of 2008
              ======================
           Dated this the 14th day of January, 2021.

                           JUDGMENT

C.S.DIAS, J.

The appellant was the respondent in I.A No.3/2008 in O.P

No.1496/2006 of the Family Court, Palakkad. The respondent in

the appeal was the petitioner in the above application.

2. The respondent had filed IA 3/2008 seeking interim

custody of the minor child born to the couple in their wedlock.

The Family Court after considering the fact that the child was

less than 5 years of age declined to grant custody of the child to

the appellant. Aggrieved by the dismissal of IA 3/2008, the

appellant has filed this appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant

and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

4. The respondent had filed OP 1496/2006, seeking a

decree of divorce, which was allowed by the Family Court

dissolving the marriage between the respondent and the

appellant. It was in the above original petition that the appellant

MFA.No.112 OF 2008

filed IA 3/2008 seeking interim custody of the child. The Family

Court after considering the provisions in the Hindu Minority and

Guardianship Act, refused to grant interim custody of the child

to the appellant on the ground that the child was less than 5

years. The said order was passed as early as in the year 2008.

At this distance of time, after the lapse of more than 12 years,

we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned

interim order, dismissing the Interlocutory Application.

Moreover, OP 1496/2006 has attained finality and the interim

order has merged with the final judgment. Hence, reserving the

right of the appellant, if he so desires to have the custody of the

child, to file independent proceedings before the competent

Court, this appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

                                              C.S.DIAS

SKS/14.1.2021                                   JUDGE