Tanuku Phanikumar vs Tanuku Srividhya
2021 Latest Caselaw 1874 Tel

Item No.6



       THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                   AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY


                          F.C.A.No.418 of 2018

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


1.     On the last date of hearing, though learned counsel for the

appellant had stated that he did not wish to press the appeal on merits,

in view his request that he be granted visitation rights in respect of the

minor daughter of the parties, who is in the care and custody of the

respondent/mother, we had enquired from learned counsel for the

respondent/mother if his client would be ready and willing to give

visitation rights to the appellant/husband. At that stage, learned

counsel for the respondent had stated that the appellant/father has not

been paying the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month fixed for the

minor daughter and he has been in default since March, 2020. At that

stage, learned counsel for the appellant had stated that he may be

permitted to obtain instructions. We had also indicated that till the

appellant/father demonstrates his bona fides by clearing the arrears of

maintenance which till the end of April, 2021, had mounted to

Rs.1,30,000/-, we would not be inclined to grant visitation rights to

him.

2. Today, learned counsel for the appellant concedes that his client

has not cleared the arrears of maintenance payable to the

respondent/wife or the minor daughter and states that his client is

financially stressed.

3. In view of the above submission, we decline the request made

by the appellant/father for working out any visitation rights. It is left

to the parties to seek their remedies in accordance with law.

4. The present appeal is closed as not pressed along with the

pending applications, if any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

29.06.2021 JSU