Rahmath vs Shihab
2021 Latest Caselaw 9340 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                    &

       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

   FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                        OP (FC).No.326 OF 2019

        AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN GOP 1900/2017 OF
                    FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR
                                  ------

PETITIONER/S:

            RAHMATH, AGED 22 YEARS, D/O.ABDUL RASHEED,
            THATTATHAZHATH, NEAR P.S.DENTAL COLLEGE,
            PORKKULAM, AKKIKAVU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT -
            680 519.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.MAHESH V.MENON
            SRI.PRAMJI PAUL VAZHAPPILLY

RESPONDENT/S:

            SHIHAB, AGED 30 YEARS,
            S/O.ORUVIL MUHAMMED, KARIKKAD VILLAGE,
            VADAKKEKARIKKAD, KARIKKAD P.O.,
            THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 519.

            R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
            R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
            R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
            R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
            R1   BY   ADV.   SMT.P.PARVATHY
            R1   BY   ADV.   SMT.AATHIRA SUNNY
            R1   BY   ADV.   SHRI.MANAS P HAMEED
            R1   BY   ADV.   SHRI.ABDUL RASHEED N.


THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-03-
2021, THE COURT ON 19-03-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC).No.326/2019                    2




     A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & Dr.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JJ.
     --------------------------------------------------
                        O.P.(FC) No.326 of 2019
     --------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 19th day of March, 2021

                                  JUDGMENT

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

This original petition was filed challenging the

order in I.A.No.842/2019 in GOP No.1900/2017 on the

file of the Family Court, Thrissur. The petitioner is

the mother of the child and the respondent is the

father. Admittedly, the respondent-father is in abroad.

The child is in the custody of the petitioner-mother.

The Family Court, as per Ext.P4 order, directed the

petitioner to show the child to the father of the

respondent between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. of every 1 st and 3rd

Saturdays at Vayanasala in Karikad. Thereafter, the

petitioner-mother filed a petition. That was allowed

and the venue was changed to the Family Court,

Thrissur. Again, the petitioner-mother filed another

petition with a prayer to restrict the visitation right

to the respondent/father of the child alone. The Family

Court in the impugned order itself confined visitation

right to the father of the child and grandparents only.

We do not know why the petitioner has also chosen to

challenge such order. We, therefore, find no reason

to interfere with the impugned order. However, we

direct the Family Court to refer the parties for

mediation on next posting itself.

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 ORDER IN MP 2810/2017 IN MC 29/2017 OF THE JFCM, KUNNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOP NO.1900/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF IA NO.3839/2018 IN GOP NO.1900/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER IA NO.3839/2018 IN GOP NO.1900/2017.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN IA NO.5538/2018 IN IA NO.3839/2018 IN GOP NO.1900/2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF IA NO.842/2019 IN GOP NO.1900/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN IA NO.842/2019 IN GOP NO.1900/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE