Karthika vs Rajendran
2023 Latest Caselaw 3216 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
                               &
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1945
                     R.P. NO. 360 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.02.2023 IN O.P.(FC) NO.21
              OF 2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER:

         KARTHIKA
         AGED 32 YEARS
         MULLAPPILLY VEETTIL PADMANABHAN, CHETTARIKKAL
         DESOM, SOUTH KORATTY VILLAGE,CHALAKKUDY TALUK,
         THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680308.
         BY ADV K.V.BHADRA KUMARI


RESPONDENT:

         RAJENDRAN,
         VATTEKKAT PUTHENPURAYIL VEETTIL RAJAPPAN,
         PERUMBALLUR KARA, ARAKKUZHA VILLAGE,
         MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, VATTEKKATT PUTHENPURAYIL
         HOUSE, CHERUVATTUR KARA, ERAMALLUR VILLAGE,
         KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST,
         PIN - 686691.
         BY ADV LEO LUKOSE



     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                      2
R.P.No.360 of 2023 in
O.P.(FC) No.21 of 2023


                             JUDGMENT

P.G. Ajithkumar, J.

Respondent in O.P.(FC) No.21 of 2023 has filed this review

petition under Section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the

respondent.

3. In O.P.(FC) No.21 of 2023, notice was served on

the petitioner. But she did not chose to appear before this

Court. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the

respondent herein, the original petition was disposed of on

22.02.2023 modifying the order of the Family Court regarding

custody of the child. It was ordered that the respondent

should be given interim custody of the child from 10.30 a.m

to 4.00 p.m on every first and third Saturday in the presence

of Chief Ministerial officer, Munsiff's Court, Chalkudy.

4. The petitioner would contend that she could not

appear before this Court in spite of receipt of notice in the

R.P.No.360 of 2023 in O.P.(FC) No.21 of 2023

original petition for valid reasons and since the direction in the

judgment dated 22.02.2023 would cause hardship to the

child, the said judgment requires review. The directions in the

judgment dated 22.02.2023 are concerning interim custody of

the child and therefore it is liable to be reviewed in the event

of any change of circumstances or for such other sufficient

reason, modification is required in order to ensure welfare of

the child.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would submit that the child, aged six years now, has some

dietary issues and therefore giving its custody for a

continuance period from 10.30 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. to the father

may result in much stress to the child.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent

would submit that no such issue was brought to the notice of

the respondent though it is a fact that the child is a preterm

baby. The petitioner has not produced any document showing

that the child has any such digestive syndrome. However,

considering the submission of the petitioner who is none other

R.P.No.360 of 2023 in O.P.(FC) No.21 of 2023

than the mother of the child, we are of the view that it would

be appropriate to reduce the period of interaction in order to

avoid any kind of inconvenience to the child.

In such circumstances, this review petition is disposed of

modifying the judgment dated 22.02.2023 to the effect that

the respondent father shall be allowed to have interim custody

of the child from 10.30 a.m to 1.30 p.m on every first and

third Saturday. Other conditions in the said judgment will

continue. The respondent father may, if he is able to establish

an emotional bondage and affection with the child, he may

approach the Family Court after a period of three months for

the modification of the custody order.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE dkr