Dr. Vidhya Lakshmi.T.M vs Anil Raj
2025 Latest Caselaw 12602 Ker

Kerala High Court

Dr. Vidhya Lakshmi.T.M vs Anil Raj on 26 December, 2025

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

                                           2025:KER:98872

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                         PRESENT

      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

                            &

       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR

FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 5TH POUSHA, 1947

                 OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

      AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 IN IA 18/2025 IN

    OP NO.1801 OF 2022 OF FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

         DR. VIDHYA LAKSHMI.T.M, AGED 36 YEARS
         D/O T.K. MANI, THEKKEDATH KALARIKKAL HOUSE,
         PLOT NO.35, KSHB COLONY, SOUTH CHALAKUDY P.O,
         THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307.

         BY ADV SRI.E.NARAYANAN


RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

         ANIL RAJ, AGED 44 YEARS
         S/O P.G. RAJAN, INDIRAVIHAR, 39/803 B,
         AASHRAMAM ROAD, ATHANIKKAL, WEST HILL P.O,
         KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673005.

         BY ADVS. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)
         SRI.G.RAJAGOPAL (KUMMANAM)

     THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                      2025:KER:98872
OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

                                -2-


                          JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner assails Ext.P4 order of the

learned Family Court, Irinjalakuda, asserting

that her child will not be safe or comfortable

in the overnight company of his father -

respondent herein.

2. The parties were present, along with

the child, before us today; and we interacted

with them.

3. The petitioner told us unequivocally

that she wants to resume her marital

relationship with the respondent, though the

latter was unwilling.

4. We, therefore, referred the parties to

counselling, under the aegis of the Family 2025:KER:98872 OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

Counselling Centre of this Court; and we have

obtained a report.

5. We did not propose to deal with the

report in detail, but suffice to say that the

parties will have to sort out their matrimonial

issues between themselves.

6. As far as the impugned order is

concerned, it only allows the child to be in the

custody of the father from 23.12.2025 till

27.12.2025. We find no reason to intervene

because, the child, in our presence, was very

friendly with both parents, as any child of his

age would be. It is essential that the parents

understand that the child requires both of them

and that his time ought to be divided between

them equally in ideal circumstances. However, it

is because they are fighting, that the Courts 2025:KER:98872 OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

are required to intervene and make provisions.

7. That said, since the order directs the

child to be given in custody of his father on

23.12.2025, it has now become impossible to

comply with it; and hence, we asked the learned

counsel for the petitioner if his client would

agree that the child be given in custody of his

father - the respondent, from this Court today

(3 p.m.), till 6 p.m. on 29.12.2025, since this

would align with the time frame fixed by the

learned Family Court in Ext.P4.

8. With appreciation, we must record that

both sides agreed to the afore suggestion.

In the afore circumstances, with the

consent of both sides, we allow this Original

Petition to modify Ext.P4 to a limited extent,

thus granting interim custody of the child to 2025:KER:98872 OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

the respondent - father, from 3 p.m. today

(which is the time when we considered this

matter), till 6 p.m. on 29.12.2025.

Needless to say, at 6 p.m. on 29.12.2025,

the child shall be given back to the petitioner

at her residence at Chalakudy; and we record the

undertaking of the learned counsel for the

respondent that this would be done without fail.

All other directions in the impugned order

will continue to be in force.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

                                     P. KRISHNA KUMAR
akv                                         JUDGE
                                              2025:KER:98872
OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

APPENDIX OF OP (FC) NO. 777 OF 2025

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 01-12- 2022 IN THE O.P. NO. 1801/2022 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT IN O.P. NO. 1801/2022 OF FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 07.12.2025.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO. 18/2025 IN O.P. NO. 1801/2022 DATED 09-12-2025 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO.

18/2025 IN O.P. NO. 1801/2022 DATED 12-12-2025 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN TR.P(C) NO.

526 OF 2023. DATED 25.09.2023.