SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Mad) 2234

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.SELVAM AND P.KALAIYARASAN, JJ.
P.K.Srikumar - Appellant
Vs.
Harshitha Gopinathan - Respondent
O.S.A.Nos.249 and 250 of 2015, M.P.Nos.2 to 4 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015
Decided on : 25-07-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mrs. Hema Sampath, Senior counsel for Mr. P.N.Swaminathan
For the Respondent: Mrs. Susanna Prabhu

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 13 Minor child custody – Due to comity of courts, order of foreign country’s superior court is to be respected. Child’s welfare, his happiness, full development has to be considered while deciding permanent custody of child. Child is a citizen of foreign country. Appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

P.KALAIYARASAN, J.

These two Original Side Appeals are directed against the common Judgment of the learned single Judge, dated 04.08.2015, one dismissing the Original Petition in O.P.No.285 of 2015 filed by the appellant / petitioner, seeking permanent custody of the minor child and second dismissing the suit in C.S.No.129 of 2013 filed by the appellant / plaintiff for the relief of declaration that the order / Judgment passed by the Superior Court of California, County of Orange in Case No.11D009457 on 01.05.2012 is conclusive and binding on the defendant and enforceable within the jurisdiction of Indian Courts and also for consequential declaration that the appellant / plaintiff is the natural guardian of his minor son, Srihari Srikumar and is the legal custodian of the minor child.

2. The dispute resolving the minor child about his custody is between the spouses. The brief facts, which lead to this dispute between the spouses are as follows :

(i) The appellant / husband and the respondent / wife married in India on 31.08.2007. Their marriage was solemnized at Tirupathi. For both of them, it is second marriage and the same was arranged by elders of the family. The appellant / husband is a permanent resident of United States of America and the respondent / wife had a valid H1B Visa and employed in California. Both of them came to India for the purpose of marriage and after marriage, they returned to United States of India. The respondent also got employment in TOYOTA on contract in October 2007. The respondent got conceived in January 2008. The appellants parents joined them in April 2008. Seemantham was celebrated in USA on 07.08.2008 and the parents of the respondent could not attend, as they were in India. The respondent's mother came to USA on 05.09.2008. The child was born on 16.09.2008 in USA and the minor child is by birth a citizen of USA.

(ii) In October 2008, the appellant's parents left to India and in December 2008, the respondent joined a contract job with Linksys in Irvine CA. In February 2009, when the respondent's mother returned to India, the appellant's parents joined them to take care of the child. The respondent developed depression and when the situation got escalated, she was taken to St.Joseph Hospital, California on 17.05.2009. The respondent was diagnosed as "Emotional Crisis-acute". She was prescribed medicine for a few days.

(iii) The respondent applied for extension of H1B Visa in June 2009 and the same was granted till September 2012. In July 2009, the appellant and respondent jointly purchased a property in USA. On 31.07.2009, the respondent lost her job with Linksys. Only during that time, the appellant got USA citizenship. The appellant did not apply for green card for the respondent, as his lawyer advised not to sponsor for dependant visa, in view of the recession faced in US economy and the application for grant of H1B visa for respondent was in process.

(iv) In November 2009, the appellant and respondent with the child came down to India to visit the respondent's parents and also for tonsuring of the child. They came to India with a plan to return to USA on 19.11.2009 and they had confirmed ticket for the trip. They also planned her to get a new H1B visa stamping in respondent's passport at the United States Consulate in Chennai. It could not be done due to some delay in getting a client invitation letter from the respondent's employer in USA. During the stay in India, the child Srihari, who was just one year old suffered high fever continuously for a few days. It was time when swine flu was widely spreading and the child was not vaccinated against swine flu. After consulting the respondent, the appellant and the minor child along with the appellant's parents returned back to USA as planned on 19th November 2009. The respondent informed the appellant that she would return to USA as soon as her stamping is done at the US consulate in Chennai.

(v) On 18.04.2010, the appellant asked the resp






















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top