Point of Law: Visitation / talking rights given to the biological father of the child Ms.Rashi of Mr.Suryakant Goel need not continue, as it may have adverse psychological effect on the child Ms.Rashi who is of tender age

JUDGMENT :

VINEET KOTHARI, J.

1. The present dispute before us in the form of First Appeal, connected Cross-Objections and Contempt Petition, revolves around the Visitation Rights sought by grandparents – Lieutenant Colonel Iqbal Bahadur Tegh Bahadur Dutt (Retd.) (Aged 72 years) and his wife – Sandhya Iqbal Bahadur Dutt (Aged 64 years) in respect of girl child ‘Dhairya’, aged about 9 years now, born on 12.4.2012 out of the wedlock of their son – Saurabh Iqbal Bahadur Tegh Bahadur Dutt, Major in the Indian Army and Respondent – Dr. (Dentist) Mrs.Ann S. Dutt (Aged about 37 years), aggrieved by the order dated 31.1.2019 passed by the Judge, Family Court No.4, Ahmedabad (Mrs. Minal Nihal Gadkari), who, on Civil Misc. Application No.101 of 2016, passed the following final order on 31.1.2019 :

“1. The present application is partly allowed.

2. It is hereby order that the applicant’s grandparents of minor ‘Dhairya’ shall have right of visitation to meet and to see her on every first Saturday of every month at the Mediation Center, during 2.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. till 1 years from the date of this order and thereafter, they shall permitted to take her with them for outing on aforesaid day and period.

3. It is also directed to opponent that during the visitation hour she shall handover the custody of minor child to applicants in Mediation Center and facilitate them to meet minor child in her absence.

4. Both the parties would take proper care and would maintain interest of the minor during visitation period.

5. Necessary yadi to sent the Mediation Center of Family Court, Ahmedabad. Pronounced in the open Court on 31st day of January, 2019.

Sd/-

(Mrs.Minal Nihal Gadkari)

Judge

Family Court No.4, Ahmedabad

(Code No.GJ00425)”

2. The matrimonial dispute between Major Saurabh and his wife Dr.Ann S. Dutt, whose marriage took place on 3.12.2009, arose in the year 2013 and the Respondent – wife started living separately with her own parents since January, 2013. The dispute between the two sides aggravated so much that even though they are living only 800 mtrs. apart in the same Satellite area of Ahmedabad as per the address given and the fact as noted by the Family Court that the grandparents claimed custody of the child ‘Dhairya’ and inter-alia raised a ground that 88 years old great grandmother, the mother of Mrs.Sandhya Iqbal Bahadur Dutt were longing to see the child and they being senior citizens, grandparents being fully qualified, educated and well-off financially were in a position to take good care of the child born to their son and his estranged wife, the Respondent herein.

3. The visitation rights were accordingly allowed by the Family Court in the aforesaid manner, as quoted above. The present First Appeal was filed by the two grandparents as the son Major Saurabh was living at outside stations depending upon his postings in the Army at different places and initially, a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed a detailed order on 6.5.2019 while admitting the present First Appeal. The said order is also quoted below for ready reference :

“In light of the earlier order, more particularly in view of the submission by the mother of the child that she would not be available till 12.5.2019 and having regard to the fact that before 12.5.2019, the Court would close for Summer Vacation, we considered it appropriate (since though the appeal is listed in today's cause list the cross objection are not listed/placed alongwith the appeal) to direct the registry to list the Cross Objection and place the papers before us today. Accordingly, the office has, in response to the direction, listed and placed the Cross Objection.

2. Against the order dated 31.1.2019 passed by learned Family Court in Civil Misc. Application No.101 of 2016, the original applicant as well as original opponent have taken out captioned proceedings in First Appeal No.694 of 2019 and cross objection No.20 of 2019. The original applicant has filed captioned First Appeal No.694 of 2019 whereas the o