Kerala High Court
Arun J.S vs Rani S on 1 July, 2025
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
2025:KER:47659
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1947
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
OPGW NO.423 OF 2022, FAMILY COURT, NEYYATTINKARA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
ARUN J.S, AGED 36 YEARS
S/O JAYAKUMAR, ALAMPARA THEKKE PUTHEN VEEDU,
NARANI, KUNNATHUKAL P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695504.
BY ADVS. SMT.NIKITA NAIR C.S.
SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE
SRI.T.G.SUNIL (PERUMBAVOOR)
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
RANI S, D/O SARASU,
THENGUKUZHI MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, KODANNOOR,
KOOVALASERRY P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695512.
SRI.RENJU MOHAN
SMT.SAREENA S., SRI.PYARIN B.KURUVITHADAM
SMT.THEERTHA NAIR
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
-2-
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran, J.
Though the petitioner challenges Ext.P4
order of the learned Family Court, Neyyattinkara
- which permitted the respondent to take the
child to the United Kingdom (UK) with her - he
is now ready to allow such, provided some of his
conditions are satisfied.
2. The change of scenario happened because
the parties were before us yesterday, along with
the child, and we allowed them to interact,
leading to an effective discussion between them.
3. After such interaction, when we talked
to the parties, the petitioner agreed that the
child can be taken by the respondent to the
U.K., however, only if he is allowed to talk to
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
the child every day through video call; and that
her citizenship and name are not altered without
his permission. He also required that the child
be brought by the respondent to India at least
once in a year, coinciding with her school
recess, for a minimum period of 30 days, out of
which he be granted at least 25 days to be with
her.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent
acceded to the afore suggestions; however,
requesting that this Court modify the impugned
order, allowing his client to be not only the
sole custodian but also the "parent with sole
responsibility for the child's upbringing", as
required to obtain Visa for travel and stay in
the U.K.
5. Pertinently, the petitioner accepted
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
the afore suggestion, but pleaded that it be
clarified that this may not be construed as him
having no rights over the child and that the
afore status is being offered to the mother only
for the purpose of taking the child to the U.K.
and for her residence there.
In view of the above consent, it is now
unnecessary for us to write a long judgment; and
therefore, dispose of this Original Petition
with the following directions, thus modifying
Ext.P4:
(a) The respondent - mother is confirmed
to be the sole custodian and the parent with
sole responsibility for upbringing of the child
- Niya Arun; and consequently, she is permitted
to take the latter with her to the U.K.
(b) The respondent shall, as has been
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
ordered in Ext.P4, furnish her residential and
official credentials, along with her e-mail
address and phone number, before the learned
Family Court, before the child is finally taken
to U.K.
(c) The petitioner is permitted to talk to
the child after she reaches the U.K., every day
between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. (U.K. time);
however, ensuring that it does not interfere
with her curricular or extracurricular
activities. We record the undertaking of the
learned counsel for the respondent that his
client shall facilitate this without any
impediment.
(d) The respondent will bring the child to
Kerala at least once every year on any of her
school holidays/vacations as per the school
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
calendar; however, for a minimum period of 30
days, out of which the petitioner will be
entitled to her interim custody for 25 days. For
this purpose, we direct the respondent to inform
the petitioner of her next arrival to Kerala at
least two weeks in advance, so that he can then
make arrangements to take custody and retain the
child with him for the aforementioned duration.
The place of exchange for this, as agreed by the
parties, will be in front of the residential
gate of the house of the mother in Kerala,
namely at Thiruvananthapuram.
(e) The afore arrangement will continue
until such time as any other order is issued by
the learned Family Court.
After we dictated this part of the
judgment, the learned counsel for the petitioner
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
requested that the parties be allowed an
opportunity to settle all other disputes between
them.
We cannot interfere with the afore liberty
of the parties; and we, therefore, leave it open
to them to make such effort and report to the
learned Family Court as per law.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
M.B.SNEHALATHA
akv JUDGE
2025:KER:47659
OP (FC) NO. 353 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 353/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE O.P (G & W)
NO:1346/2018 OF THE FILES OF THE
HON'BLE FAMILY COURT NEDUMANGADU,
WHICH WAS LATER TRANSFERRED TO HON'BLE
FAMILY COURT NEYYATTINKARA, RENUMBERED
AS O.P (G & W) NO:423/2022
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF I.A 2/2025 IN O.P(G&W)
NO:423/2022
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF I.A 3/2025 IN O.P(G&W)
NO:423/2022
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
05-04-2025 IN O.P.(G&W) 423/2022
