IMPORTANT POINT
The court clarified that errors in custody orders can be corrected and that estoppel cannot prevent a party from seeking relief when an error has occurred.

ORDER :

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

The issues arising for consideration in these review petitions are closely interlinked and they are, therefore, disposed of by this common order. Parties are referred to in this order for convenience, as they appear in R.P.No.581 of 2024. The review petitioner is the petitioner in the original petition, from which the said review petition arises viz, O.P.(FC) No.683 of 2023. The respondent is the respondent therein and the former wife of the petitioner. The dispute relates to the custody of their minor child, Adwaith.

2. The petitioner filed G.O.P. 1537 of 2016 before the Family Court, Thrissur, seeking orders declaring him as the guardian of the child. The said proceedings was disposed of based on a mediation settlement, in terms of which permanent custody of the child was given to the respondent, subject to the visitation rights of the petitioner. Subsequently, when the respondent entered into a second marriage and relocated to Canada to pursue higher studies entrusting the child with her parents in India, the petitioner filed I.A.No.20 of 2023 seeking orders granting permanent custody of the child to him by modifying the order passed in the proceedings, and I.A.No.40 of 2023, seeking orders permitting the petitioner to take the child to Dubai, where he is presently working, so as to enable the child to continue his education there. The petitioner also filed I.A.No.43 of 2023 seeking interim custody of the child pending disposal of I.A.Nos.20 and 40 of 2023.

3. When the petitioner preferred the above referred interlocutory applications, the respondent filed I.A.No.26 of 2023 seeking orders permitting her to take the child to Canada and I.A.No.27 of 2023 seeking orders modifying the visitation rights granted to the petitioner in terms of the order originally passed by the Court. The Family Court dismissed I.A.Nos.26 and 27 of 2023 and allowed I.A.Nos.20 and 40 of 2023 subject to the visitation rights of the respondent and her parents and also on condition that the child shall be taken to the place of employment of the petitioner, Dubai only in the ensuing academic year. I.A.No.43 of 2023 was closed on the same day in the light of the order passed on I.A.Nos.20 and 40 of 2023.

4. The petitioner filed O.P.(FC) No.683 of 2023 challenging the order passed by the Family Court in I.A.No.43 of 2023 with a prayer to modify the same and allow him to take the child to Dubai in the same academic year itself. The respondent filed O.P.(FC) No.63 of 2024 challenging the orders passed by the Family Court in I.A.Nos.20 and 40 of 2023 and O.P.(FC) No.108 of 2024 challenging the orders passed by the Family Court in I.A.Nos.26 and 27 of 2023.

5. This Court disposed of the original petitions by a common judgment, and the review of the said judgment is sought in these review petitions. The petitioner has grievance only against the order of the Family Court in I.A.No.43 of 2023 and consequently, he preferred only R.P.No.581 of 2024 initially, seeking review of the judgment in O.P.(FC) No.683 of 2023. The remaining review petitions were later filed by way of abundant caution, as it was apprehended that the petitioner may not be able to pursue R.P.No.581 of 2024 without seeking review of the orders passed in O.P.(FC) Nos.63 and 108 of 2024 also.

6. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the respondent.

7. As noted, this Court disposed of the original petitions with a direction to the maternal grandparents to handover custody of the child to the petitioner and permitting him to take the child to Dubai to enable the child to continue his education at Dubai as an interim measure, clarifying that as and when the mother is able to take the child to Canada, she can move the Family Court with an application for custody. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order sought to be reviewed read thus:

“2. Having considered all the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that it is in the best interest of t