Child requires both parents and he cannot take sides in matrimonial cases.

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order of dismissal dated 14. 2006 passed in I.A.No.98 of 2006 in H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Erode.

2. This is a case of an husband and wife fighting over the matrimonial cause relating to the dissolution of their marriage before the trial Court and have put their child on a burner unmindful of its future consequences. This is not a case where the King Solomons rule can be applied and ask the child to be cut by a sword to find out the real mother. But in this case, the real father and the mother are fighting and the child is called as a witness to speak about the truth or otherwise of the averments made in the pleadings filed by them before the trial Court. The father has brought the minor son and had put him on the witness stand to speak against his mother and the mother has objected to the same. The trial Court has brushed aside the objection of the mother (the revision petitioner herein) and held that the child witness was competent to speak about the dispute between the wife (petitioner) and the husband (respondent) and taken on record the sworn affidavit filed by the minor. The question raised in this Civil Revision Petition is whether such an action is permissible in law.

.3. Now reverting to certain basic facts of the case:

.The revision petitioner is the wife and she has filed the present Civil Revision Petition against the order dated 14. 2006 passed by the Sub-Court, Erode, in I.A. No.98 of 2006 in H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2005. The respondent herein is the husband, who had filed a petition under Section 13(1) read with Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking for a decree of divorce from the revision petitioner/wife. The said petition was taken on file as H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2005. The main ground on which the Original Petition was filed was that the revision petitioner/wife had deserted the respondent/husband and gone to her parents house on 14. 2005 without any valid reason. During the subsistence of the marriage, which took place on 111. 1992, the petitioner and the respondent had two children out of which one was a male child, viz., Aravind, studying fifth standard and the other was a female child, viz., Suganthi, studying third standard on the date of the filing of the petition.

.4. The respondent/wife filed a detailed counter statement dated 29. 2005 and refuted the contentions of the petitioner. She also alleged that the respondent was of immoral character and he had an affair with a colleague in his office and on her representation, that lady was transferred to a different place. She also stated that at times, the respondent used to beat her up and that he is preventing the children from talking to her. She wanted the dismissal of the petition and also stated that she will take appropriate custody of the children and decided to file an interim petition for maintenance pending litigation.

5. It is at this stage, when the petitioner gave evidence as P.W.1, he also filed a proof affidavit in January 2006 signed by his son Aravind, who was only 11 years old at that time, and on that affidavit was to be cross-examined, as a witness P.W.2 on the side of the respondent/husband. In that affidavit, the said minor Aravind has stated that he was aware of the petitions pending before the trial Court and that he and his sister were staying with the respondent father and they are maintained by him and their entire education and other expenses are met by the respondent father. He also stated that his mother always used to quarrel in the house and many times, she used to leave for his grandmothers house and abuse the respondent, that she had made attempts to split them from their father and on his own accord, he is staying with his father and it is difficult to stay with his mother. Further, he also volunteered to state that his younger sister is not taken care of by his mother and his father does not have any bad habit