1. Rule. Returnable forthwith.

2. This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner-wife challenging the order of Family Court No.4, Mumbai dated 13.10.2010 allowing the husband’s application for striking off her defence. This application came to be made upon the breach of the order of granting access passed by the Family Court. The parties have had numerous disputes and litigations since the husband sued for divorce, an order of injunction in respect of residence of the parties and custody of the children in the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai on 3rd March, 2008.

3. The parties have three children now aged 16, 15 & 9 years. The husband applied for access to his children initially on 08.10.2009. The wife resisted that application essentially on the ground that the husband was not attached to the children, was harassing them by spoiling their reputation with their friends with the reason that the children were left alone with no one to play with. The wife contended that the children suffered unreasonable behaviour of the husband and started hating him. She also alleged that the Petitioner dragged them in the litigation and that it is dangerous to allow the Petitioner to take the children for half the vacation. She denied that the access claimed by the Petitioner would be beneficial to the children. The learned Family Court Judge passed an order after interviewing all the three children independently. He observed that the children were reluctant to meet the father. This was when the children were in the custody of the wife. That important fact must be always present to the mind of the interviewer. The consequence of the custody with one parent is often such reluctance. Nevertheless the learned Judge exercised caution. He passed an order of very limited access. The access was to be for one hour each in a fortnight on 2 Saturdays a month. He observed that that would be gradually increased. He also observed that for the welfare of the children, love and affection between the children and the father should be developed and, therefore, access was absolutely necessary. He rejected the Diwali vacation access of the Diwali of 2009. Consequently he partly allowed the application. He directed the wife to bring all her children to the Family Court Children Complex on 1st and 3rd working Saturdays of each month. He directed the husband to apply for future vacation access later. The order has been passed since 14.10.2009.

4. The husband states that it has never been complied on any of the working Saturdays directed. He, therefore, claims that the very beginning was not made. He claims that he regularly attended the children complex and the wife always absented herself. She failed to bring the children as directed. He claims that the wife never wanted the children to be with their father though the children would be very happy with him.

5. Though this order is stated to be breached, both parties have produced various other applications, replies and orders in the aforesaid petition made by and between the parties. The application was made on 8th October, 2009. The reply of the wife has been filed on 12th October, 2009. The children were brought to Court on 12th October, 2009 as required by the practice of the Court for counselling. The wife as well as the children had to meet the Counsellor also on 12th October, 2009. It appears that there were disputes even at the time of that interview. The husband has filed an affidavit showing what transpired before the Counsellor at the time of counselling by his affidavit dated 12th October, 2009. The wife has filed the reply by her affidavit after the aforesaid order came to be passed on 5th November, 2009. It is hardly material to go into the allegations and counter-allegations by the parties. What is material is the order of access which must be obeyed or at least strived to be obeyed.

6. It has been the case of the wife that the children do not want to meet the father. She claims that she cannot