Pasham Venkataramana Reddy vs Smt. Dandamudi Deepa
2021 Latest Caselaw 1778 Tel

Item No.8
      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                   AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
                          F.C.A.No.15 of 2021

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)

1.     Pursuant to the last order dated 16.04.2021, appearance is

entered on behalf of the respondent/mother. The scope of the present

appeal is fairly limited. The appellant/father is aggrieved by the

common order dated 05.10.2020 passed by the learned Family Court

disposing of three applications filed by him. The subject matter of the

present appeal is the order passed in O.P.No.138 of 2016 wherein, the

prayer made was to restrain the respondent/mother from shifting the

minor son of the parties to any other country till he completes

Intermediate and if there is any reason for the child to travel to any

country for his education or extra-curricular activities, the

respondent/mother to take prior permission from the Court.

2. By the impugned order, the learned Family Court has allowed

O.P.No.138 of 2016 and has restrained the respondent/mother from

shifting the minor son to any other country till he completes

Intermediate. It has also been directed that if there is any necessity for

the child to be taken to any other country for his education or extra-

curricular activities, prior permission from the court will be obtained

by the respondent/mother.

3. The appellant/father is present today. Mr. Rajashekar

Thallapally, learned counsel for the appellant states that the

appellant/father has an apprehension that the respondent/mother might

shift the child from out of Hyderabad to any other place or to another

country and if that happens, then he would not be able to have access

to the child at all.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent refutes the aforesaid

submission and states that the respondent/mother is gainfully

employed in Hyderabad, has admitted the child in a school in

Hyderabad and she has no intention of changing her place of

residence. He submits that even if she does propose to change her

place of residence in the future, the respondent/mother undertakes to

approach the learned Family Court and seek prior permission.

5. The respondent/mother is bound down by the statement made

on her behalf as recorded above. She shall file an affidavit within one

week on the same lines with a copy furnished to learned counsel for

the appellant.

6. In our view, the aforesaid statement is sufficient to assuage any

anxiety expressed by learned counsel for the appellant about being

deprived of access to the minor child. With these directions, the

present appeal is disposed of along with the pending applications, if

any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 22.06.2021 JSU