Telangana High Court
Yeluguri Andalu vs Maragoni Sandeep Goud on 11 January, 2023
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
In the High Court for the State of Telangana
Civil Revision Petition No. 881 of 2022
Between:
Yeluguri Andalu
... Petitioner
and
Maragoni Sandeep Goud
...Respondent
Date of Judgment Pronounced: 11-01-2023
Submitted for Approval:
Hon'ble Smt. Justice LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Whether Reporters of Local newspapers No
may be allowed to see the judgments ?
Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes
marked to Law Reporters/Journals
Whether Her Lordship wish to Yes
see the fair copy of the Judgment ?
_____________________________
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J)
2
* Hon'ble Smt. Justice LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Civil Revision Petition No. 881 OF 2022
% Dated 11.01.2023
Between:
Yeluguri Andalu
... Petitioner
and
Maragoni Sandeep Goud
...Respondent
! Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K. Sitaram
^ Counsel for the respondent : Sri P. Vijay Kumar
GIST:
HEAD NOTE:
? Cases cited:
3
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 881 OF 2022
O R D E R:
The present Revision is filed aggrieved by the order
dated 25.03.2022 in I.A.No. 291 of 2021 in G.W.O.P.No. 55 of
2021 on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District
Judge, Nalgonda.
2. The O.P. was filed by the grandmother seeking
custody of her granddaughter who is residing with her father.
While the said Guardian O.P. is pending, an Application is filed
under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act (for short,
'the Act') for granting visitation rights to the grandmother to visit
the child once in a week i.e. on Sunday from 09.00 a.m. to
09.00 p.m. The said Application was dismissed vide order
impugned observing that 'the Court heard the minor child in view
of Section 17(2) and (3) of the Act. The minor child stated to the
Court that her grandparents are saying bad about her father, that
she has no willingness to live with the grandparents and that she
has no objection for ordering visiting rights at the house of her
father. The grandmother did not clearly mention in the affidavit
as to where the minor granddaughter is studying and where it is
practicable to meet her maternal granddaughter. Taking into
consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and
all contentions of both sides the Court is of the considered opinion
that visiting rights cannot be granted as prayed for.' Assailing
the same, the present Revision is filed.
3. Sri K. Sitaram, learned counsel for the
grandmother, who is the petitioner in O.P. submits that
petitioner is mother-in-law of the respondent and marriage of
the respondent and the petitioner's daughter was solemnised on
05.05.2011 as per the customs and traditions. It is submitted
that before the marriage, the respondent informed her that he
completed B.Tech., MBA in London and has been working as a
private employee in IBM, Bengaluru and getting handsome
amount of salary and further informed that he is the only son of
his parents and having more movable and immovable
properties. Believing the same, by giving dowry and other
articles, the petitioner performed the marriage of her daughter,
after sometime, the respondent started harassing the daughter
physically and mentally. Several times, they tried to pacify the
same. Learned counsel submits that in the month of November,
2012, the petitioner came to know that her daughter conceived,
even thereafter, the respondent did not take care of her and
neglected her and being a mother, she took care of her health
till her delivery on 17.06.2013 and her daughter was blessed
with a female child who is named as Shreshta and is now aged
about eight years. It is submitted that not able to bear the
harassment, at her in-laws house at Nalgonda Town, on
27.09.2013, the petitioner's daughter attempted to commit
suicide by taking Lyzol, thereafter, she was shifted to Suraksha
Hospital, Nalgonda and after the treatment, she was discharged
from the hospital. When she went to the in-laws house of her
daughter, the petitioner has observed the worst situation of her
daughter and the petitioner questioned the respondent and his
family members with regard to the harassment and all of them
agreed their mistakes and promised that they will not harass
the daughter of the petitioner in future. The respondent also
blamed the petitioner stating that her daughter is having health
problems and he never led happy married life with her daughter.
The daughter passed away on 15.03.2020 and the father of the
respondent executed an agreement on Rs.100/- non-judicial
stamp paper in the presence of the witnesses in favour of his
minor granddaughter agreeing to transfer agriculture lands and
house plots in her favour. Thereafter, on 23.03.2020, he died
due to his health problems. After his demise, the respondent
totally changed his attitude, he developed grudge against the
petitioner and her husband and he threatened them with dire
consequences and he is not allowing to meet their
granddaughter. It is submitted that the deceased was the only
daughter and they have utmost love and affection towards her
minor granddaughter and the respondent is intentionally
keeping her away from them and he has been fostering his
daughter against the petitioner by injecting aversion. The
petitioner is suffering a lot assuming that the respondent may
not give any space to the petitioner to meet her granddaughter
in her life time. It is submitted that along with the deceased
daughter, the petitioner has a son who is married and the
daughter-in-law is a doctor in USA and both of them are settled
abroad. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is having
financial capacity to look after the welfare and education of the
minor granddaughter and she has filed an Application seeking
her interim custody.
Learned counsel submits that the Court below
while passing the order has even failed to consider the affection
and attachment of a grandmother towards her granddaughter,
particularly when she lost her daughter. It is submitted that the
girl has never stated that she is not interested to meet the
grandparents at her house and without considering that and
without assigning proper reasons, the Court below dismissed
the Application on the frivolous ground of petitioner not
mentioning the place where the grand daughter is studying and
not mentioning any place where she wants to meet, that alone
cannot be a reason for the learned Judge to dismiss the
Application. He submits that where the human relations and
human feelings are involved, the Judge ought not to have
refused the request for visitation rights which is a legitimate
expectation and right of the grandmother.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent Sri P. Vijay
Kumar submits that the girl was examined by the Court below
and she is not showing any interest to meet the grandmother.
He submits that as she likes her father and grandparents are
talking bad about her father, she is not willing to meet her
grandparents. He further submits that the Court below taking
all these into consideration particularly the child's
unwillingness, has passed the order impugned.
5. When the Revision came up on 19.07.2022, this
Court passed the following order:
"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
daughter of the petitioner expired on 16.02.2020 and the
granddaughter of the petitioner is aged about eight years. The
respondent, who is the father of the child, contracted second
marriage. The petitioner filed G.W.O.P.No.55 of 2021 seeking
custody of the child and pending the same, Interlocutory
application is filed seeking interim custody of the child. He
submits that the Court below, without considering the
application in its proper perspective, has dismissed the
interlocutory application on 25.03.2022 observing that "This
court heard the minor child in view of Section 17(2) and (3) of the
Act. The minor child stated to the court that her grandparents are
saying bad about her father, that she has no willingness to live
with the grandparents and that she has no objection for ordering
visiting rights at the house of her father. The petitioner did not
clearly mention in the affidavit as to where the minor grand-
daughter is studying and where it is practicable to meet her
maternal granddaughter. Taking into consideration the entire
facts and circumstances of the case and all contentions of both
sides the court is of the considered opinion that visiting rights
cannot be granted as prayed for". He further submits that being
the grandmother of the child, she is entitled for visitation rights
and the child said that she has no objection for meeting at the
house of her father. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that in the order dated 25.03.2022, the learned Judge except
stating that the child was examined and she is not willing to live
with the grandparents, no other reasons are assigned for refusal
of visitation rights.
Learned counsel for the respondent submits that
the Court below taking into consideration all the relevant
aspects has refused the permission. He submits that even the
petitioner has not stated when and where she wants to meet the
child.
In the order, it is mentioned that child is willing to
meet the petitioner. Petitioner being the grandparent has every
right to meet the grandchild pending custody petition. As an
interim measure, this court deems it appropriate to permit the
petitioner to visit the child at her school i.e., Birla Open Minded
International School, Kollapur, on 24.07.2022 and 31.07.2022
between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 Noon."
6. On 19.10.2022, when the matter came up, it is
submitted that the grandparents could not meet the child.
Then this Court has directed the petitioner -respondent to be
present along with the child on 26.10.2022. On 26.10.2022,
this Court has passed the following order:
" This Civil Revision Petition is filed questioning the
order dated 25.03.2022 in I.A.No. 291 of 2021 in G.W.O.P.No.
55 of 2021. I.A.No. 291 of 2021 is filed by the grand-mother
seeking visitation rights of the grand daughter. The said Petition
was dismissed observing that 'the Court heard the minor child
in view of Section 17(2) and (3) of the Act and the minor child
stated to the Court that her grandparents are saying bad about
her father, that she has no willingness to live with the
grandparents and that she has no objection for ordering visiting
rights at the house of her father. The petitioner did not clearly
mention in the affidavit as to where it is practicable to meet her
maternal granddaughter. Taking into consideration the entire
facts and circumstances of the case and all contentions of both
sides the Court is of the considered opinion that visiting rights
cannot be granted as prayed for and accordingly, the Court
dismissed the said I.A.' Assailing the said order, the present
Revision is filed.
This Court by order dated 19.07.2022, observed that
the petitioner being the grandparent has every right to meet the
grandchild pending custody petition and as an interim measure,
this Court deems it appropriate to permit the petitioner to visit
the child at her school ie Birla Open Minded International
School, Kollapur on 24.07.2022 and 31.07.2022 between 10.00
a.m. and 12.00 Noon.
When this matter came up before this Court, on
19.10.2022, it is stated that the girl is reluctant to meet her
grandparents at the school and if it is at home, they have no
problem. Then this Court has directed that the child shall be
present before this Court on 26.10.2022.
Today, this Court has interacted with the child in
the chamber and during the conversation, it is stated that as
the grandparents are talking bad about her father she is not
interested and thereafter, the child started crying saying that
whenever she goes to her grand mother, she remembers her
mother and that is the reason she is avoiding to meet her. This
Court is of the view that the girl in the process of keeping
herself away from the memories of her late mother, is avoiding
to meet the grandmother. When the girl lost her mother and
deprived of her mother's love and affection, all the more reason
that she should have the interaction and affection of her
maternal grandparents. The grandmother also appeared before
the Court in the chambers and submitted that they lost their
daughter and as her son-in-law has already married another
woman, at this point of time, they only want to meet the girl
once in a week and she also stated that except meeting their
grand-daughter, they will not say anything against her son-in-
law.
This Court exercising parens patriae jurisdiction
has to look at the ultimate wellbeing of the minor child in all
aspects. In the considered opinion of this Court, the grand-
daughter is entitled to and should have the love and affection of
the maternal grandparents. Hence, the petitioner is permitted
to meet her grand daughter in 'Magna Majestic Meadows' a club
house, Osman Nagar, Tellapur on 30.10.2022 between 10.00
a.m. and 12.00 Noon.
List this matter on 02.11.2022. Basing on the
feedback from the girl, subsequent orders will be passed.
The girl and the maternal grand- parents alone shall
spend two hours time."
7. Thereafter, when the Revision came up on
04.11.2022, this Court has interacted with the girl,
grandparents as well as father in the chambers. The
grandparents consistently on two occasions, have specifically
stated that if the father is not interested to give custody of the
child, they will confine their request to visitation rights. They
have stated that the respondent can specify his convenient time
and place, they will go and meet the grand-daughter and they
will not even utter a word against her father. What they want at
this age is the opportunity to spend some good time with the
grand-daughter and also want to see their daughter in her.
8. When this Court has interacted with the child,
initially, she stated the same-thing as what she has stated
before the Court below that the grand-parents are talking bad
about her father and she is not interested to meet them. On
further queries from the Court, she suddenly started crying
stating that after her mother's death, whenever she visits or
meet her grand-mother, she is immediately reminded of her
mother and she cannot control her tears and it takes lot of time
for her to come to normalcy. Then the Court tried to console her
saying that she lost her mother and she has every right and
need to have the love and affection of her grand-mother, further,
she should always remember her mother with a positive note
and a good feeling, she should not try to get rid of her mother's
memories and in that process, she should not refuse to meet
her grand-mother. She agreed that she will meet her in the club
house of her villas / apartment. Then finally, the Court
interacted with the father. He said that his wife had some health
issues which were suppressed by his mother-in-law and got her
married. He submits that he has taken care of his wife very
well. In spite of it, his in-laws have lodged cases against him.
Even his daughter is also aware of those cases. In view of the
conduct of the grand-parents, girl is not interested to meet
them. This Court has tried to make the father understand that
for the psychological and overall growth and development of the
girl, she needs to have the affection of the grandparents. He
replied stating that if she talks to the grand-mother, they may
say something against him and he will lose his daughter as
such he is not interested. But still the Court insisted that the
grand-mother is entitled for visitation rights, girl as well as the
father has specifically requested the Court that they can come
to the club house. Thereafter, as per the Court order, the
grand-mother went to Magna Majestic Meadows, club house,
Oman Nagar, Tellapur on 30.10.2022 between 10.00 a.m. and
12.00 Noon. The granddaughter and her father came to the
place with security. Neither the girl has come to the
grandmother nor she was permitted to meet her. When this
Court has interacted with the girl, she has come up with the
same excuse as was stated on the first occasion that they will
talk about her father. From the entire conversation this Court
had with the girl, it appears that she is completely tutored by
the father and was made to develop hard feelings against the
grand-mother. The father is trying to tutor her in such a way
that she is not showing any interest to meet the grand-parents.
A small girl of eight years knows every minute thing about the
cases and several issues. Admittedly, she is staying with the
father, paternal grand-mother and step mother. All these issues
she can only know if the father and other family members tell
her and discuss with her. The moment the girl saw her
grandmother in the chambers, she started crying and the Court
could see the emotions of the girl. This Court is of the
considered opinion that the father with the ego issues towards
his mother-in-law i.e. petitioner is meddling with the child's
upbringing which will have long-lasting consequences on child's
physical and psychological aspects. The Court can clearly see
that the girl is very much emotional on these issues and it
appears that father is trying to emotionally blackmail her.
9. This Court while exercising the parens patriae
jurisdiction has to look at the welfare of the child and at all
times, the welfare of the child should be the paramount
consideration for the Court. Court cannot look at the disputes of
the mother-in-law and the son-in-law. Their inter se disputes
should not have the effect on the mental growth of the child and
with this kind of hatred towards grandparents, if the upbringing
takes place, the child will definitely not evolve into a good
human being and this will have life time negative effect. From
the grandparent point of view also, she lost her only daughter
and they want to have the love and affection of the minor
daughter which they are entitled to and the father without any
ground, cannot deny and deprive them of their right. The kind of
love and affection, sense of security and warmth a grand-child
derive from the presence of the grand-parents is undoubtedly
significant. If anybody is asked about the memories of
childhood, immediately what comes to the mind is about the
grandma tales. The interaction of grandchild with the grand-
parents is good in the interest of both parties so that the grand-
parents can express love and affection to the grand-daughter
and develop the bond with the child and it would be conducive
for the overall well being of the child. While dealing with any of
the issues pertaining to the child, the paramount consideration
of the Court is the welfare of the child. The wellbeing of the child
has to be looked into from several perspectives. If the father is
able to take care of the child that alone cannot be the
consideration. A child will evolve into a complete person basing
on his / her experience, the way she was taken care of by near
and dear in life. Every child is entitled for a happy childhood.
Unfortunately, in this case, the child lost her mother, father is
already married and no doubt, he is taking care of her but at
the same time, she needs to enjoy the pampering, love and
affection of the grand-parents.
10. In McGrath (infants), Re (1893) 1 Ch 143: 62 LJ Ch
208 (CA), it was observed that, "... The dominant matter for the
consideration of the court is the welfare of the child. But the
welfare of a child is not to be measured by money only, or by
physical comfort only. The word welfare must be taken in its
widest sense. The moral or religious welfare of the
child must be considered as well as its physical well-being. Nor
can the ties of affection be disregarded."
11. In Walker v. Walker & Harrison, 1981 New Zed
Recent Law 257, the New Zealand Court (cited by British Law
Commission, Working Paper No. 96) stated that "welfare is an
all-encompassing word. It includes material welfare; both in the
sense of adequacy of resources to provide a pleasant home and
a comfortable standard of living and in the sense of
an adequacy of care to ensure that good health and due
personal pride are maintained. However, while material
considerations have their place they are secondary matters.
More important are the stability and the
security, the loving and understanding care and guidance, the
warm and compassionate relationships that are essential for the
full development of the child's own character, personality and
talents."
12. Grand-parents play an impressive role in a child's
life which compliments with the role of the parents. In the
considered opinion of this Court, the girl cannot be deprived of
meeting her grandparents at the behest and tutoring of the
father who does not like the grand-mother.
13. Accordingly, the order dated 25.03.2022 in I.A.No.
291 of 2021 in G.W.O.P.No. 55 of 2021 is set aside and the
grand-mother can visit the child on every Saturday between
10.00 a.m. and 12.00 Noon at Magna Majestic Meadows Club
House i.e. respondents' place pending Guardian O.P. Whenever
there is any difficulty in adhering to the schedule fixed by this
Court, it should be informed to the Court below and the Court
can grant some other day, but once in a week the petitioner /
grandparents shall be permitted to meet the girl.
14. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly, allowed.
No order as to costs.
15. The miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand
closed.
----------------------------------
LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J
11th January 2023
LR copy be marked.
ksld
