1. Pending suit for a declaration that the final order dated 1.11.2010 passed by the Superior Court of Cobb County, State of Georgia, USA in Civil Action File No. 10-1-8238-48, to the extent that it deals with issues of custody of the minor child Rhea Immaculate Arul, aged about 4 years is inconclusive, unenforceable, null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and the minor child and for consequential decrees of permanent injunction, the plaintiff, who is the mother of the minor child, came up with 3 applications, viz., (i) O.A.No.191 of 2011 seeking an interim order of injunction restraining the respondent father from in any manner seeking to enforce the said order of the Superior Court of Cobb County, State of Georgia, in so far as the custody of the minor child is concerned (ii) O.A.No.192 of 2011, seeking an interim order of injunction restraining the defendant from in any manner publishing any defamatory or derogatory material, lowering the reputation of the plaintiff in the eyes of the right minded persons and (iii) A.No.1220 of 2011, seeking a stay of operation of the final order dated 1.11.2010, passed by the Superior Court of Cobb County, State of Georgia, U.S.A., in Civil Action File NO.10-1-8238-48.

2. On 28.2.2011, when the above applications were moved for ad interim ex parte orders, I granted an order of interim injunction in favour of the applicant/ plaintiff in O.A.No.191 of 2011. In the other two applications, notice was ordered. After service of notice, the defendant came up with a counter in O.A.No.191 of 2011 along with a set of documents and both parties agreed to argue O.A.No.191 of 2011 in the first instance, since it concerned the custody of a minor child aged 4 years.

3. Therefore, O.A.No.191 of 2011 was taken up for hearing and I have heard Mr.J.Sivanandaraj, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/plaintiff and Ms.A.Arulmozhi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/defendant.

4. The brief facts on which the parties are not and cannot, be in dispute and which are borne out by the documents filed on either side, are as follows :

a. The plaintiff married the defendant on 23.9.2005 in Atlanta, USA. Both of them were divorcees at the time of their marriage;

b. Out of the said wedlock, the minor girl Rhea Immaculate Arul was born on 18.5.2007. The marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant ran into rough weather leading to the plaintiff herself filing a petition for divorce on 7.5.2010 on the file of the Superior Court of Cobb County, State of Georgia, USA;

c. After filing the petition for divorce on 7.5.2010 in the said Court, the plaintiff left USA on 11.5.2010 along with the child and arrived in India on 12.5.2010.

d. But she returned to U.S., on 22.5.2010 and withdrew her petition for divorce on 3.6.2010, after service of summons on the defendant on 1.6.2010;

e. On 26.7.2010, the plaintiff again came back to India with the child. Thereafter, she filed a petition in Civil Action File NO.10-1-8238-48 on the file of the same Court namely Superior Court of Cobb County, State of Georgia, praying not only for divorce, but also for primary custody of the minor child and for the grant of child support in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines. This petition dated 16-8-2010 was filed on 17.8.2010 by the plaintiff, through her counsel in U.S., though the plaintiff herself was in India at that time;

f. Upon receipt of summons in the second petition filed by the plaintiff, the respondent/defendant filed an 'Answer and Counter Claim' on 24-8-2010, seeking divorce as well as primary custody of the minor child;

g. Along with his Answer and Counter claim, the respondent also moved a 'Motion for Emergency Hearing' on his counter claim in so far as the issue of custody of child is concerned, expressing an apprehension that the plaintiff may settle down in India with the child. But the plaintiff opposed the motion for emergency hearing on the ground that she was due to attend the regul