JUDGMENT :

NEELA GOKHALE, J.

1. Rule. None appears for the Respondent despite service. The Respondent has consistently remained absent and has not filed any reply. Ms Aarti Sathe, learned Counsel along with Ms Aasavari Kadam and Ms Madhusmita Saud appears for the Petitioner husband. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. Admittedly, the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, by the learned Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, on the basis of consent terms dated 3rd July 2017 and 11th December 2017.

3. Clauses 8(a) to (d), (g), (h) (i) and (l) of the consent terms read as thus:

“(a) It is mutually agreed between the Petitioners that son Krishang shall remain in the joint custody of the Petitioners.

(b) It is mutually agreed between the Petitioners that if either of the Petitioners gets remarried, he/she will handover the custody of son Krishang to the other Petitioner who has not got remarried.

(c) It is mutually agreed between the Petitioners that the school vacation i.e. Summer, Diwali and Christmas vacations of son Krishang shall be equally shared by both the Petitioners until remarriage of either Petitioners.

(d) It is mutually agreed between the