Kerala High Court
Ranjith R vs Soumya P on 28 June, 2024
Author: Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1946
OP (FC) NO. 288 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
RANJITH R, AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. RAJENDRAN, REVATHY BHAVAN, NETTARAKONAM,
ANAD.P.O,NETTARAKONAM MURY, ANAD
VILLAGE,NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT - ., PIN - 695541
BY ADVS.
SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
R.RAJITHA
CHITHRA S.BABU
RESPONDENT/S:
SOUMYA P , AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.PARVATHY, MAKKOTH
MARATH VEETTIL, NEAR PARAYANKAVU TEMPLE, OLLUR
VIA, THRIKKUR P.O, THRIKKUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM
TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-, PIN - 680306
BY ADVS.
MAHESH V MENON
RAJITHA V.K(K/1199/2020)
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(FC) No.288 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
This petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated
12.02.2024 in I.A.No.4 of 2024 in O.P.No. 1253 of 2023 on the file
of the Family Court, Irinjalakuda. The aforesaid application was
filed by the petitioner father seeking overnight custody for a period
of one month during the summer vacations. The aforesaid
application was filed on 27.03.2024.
2. The Family Court by the impugned order permitted the
petitioner to have day custody on 10.05, 11.05 and 12.05 of 2024.
He was also permitted to interact with the child during all second
Saturdays and following Sundays from 10.00 a.m to 4.00 p.m from
the Family Court premises, Irinjalakuda.
3. Sri.Santhosh Poduval, the learned counsel submits that
the petitioner had only sought for overnight custody during the
vacation period. However, by the interim order, arrangement for
the subsequent period was also made by the Family Court. It is
further submitted that the Family Court has erred in not granting
overnight custody of the child to the father.
4. By order dated 20.04.2024, we directed the parties to
appear before us.
5. We have interacted with the petitioner, respondent as
well as the minor child. It appears that the wife has instituted
various proceedings before the Family Court and the same are
pending. We find that the application is filed by the father only for
overnight custody during vacation. That period is over.
6. We are of the view that necessary direction can be
issued to the Family Court to consider the petition on its merits and
take appropriate decisions in accordance with law. It would be
open to the petitioner to file an application for contact rights/
visitation, which shall be considered by the Family court and
appropriate orders shall be passed.
Till further orders are passed by the Family Court, we direct
the respondent to grant custody of the child to the petitioner from
10.00 a.m to 04.00 p.m on all second Saturdays.
sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
das
APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 288/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 A COPY OF O.P. 619/23 BEFORE THE FAMILY
COURT, NEDUMANGAD
Exhibit -P2 . A COPY OF I.A. 4/24 IN O.P. 1253/23 BEFORE
THE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA
Exhibit -P3 A COPY OF COUNTER IN I.A. 4/24 IN O.P.
1253/23 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT,
IRINJALAKKUDA
Exhibit -P4 . A COPY OF ORDER DATED 12/4/24 IN I.A. 4/24
IN O.P. 1253/23 BEFORE THE FAMILY 'COURT,
IRINJALAKKUDA
Exhibit -P5 COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN DURING THE PERIOD
OF CUSTODY ON 23/12/23, 24/12/23 & 25/12/23
Exhibit -P6 . COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN DURING THE
PERIOD OF CUSTODY ON 10/5/24, 11/5/24 &
12/5/24
Exhibit -P7 COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN DURING THE PERIOD
OF CUSTODY ON 14/1/24
