Child custody and maintenance rulings emphasize the best interests of the child, balancing parental rights with welfare.

ORDER :

V.Lakshminarayanan, J.

These two civil revision petitions challenge the orders of the learned Principal District Judge at Thiruvallur in I.ANos.2 and 3 of 2023 in GWOP.No.112 of 2022 dated 14.10.2024.

2. Since the issues involved in both proceedings are one and the same, I clubbed the revisions together for final disposal.

3. I heard Mr.M.Guruprasad for the civil revision petitioner/father and Mr.T.SaiKrishnan for the respondent/mother.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as the father and mother.

5. The civil revision petitioner is the father. He solemnized his wedding with the mother on 10.12.2012. From the wedlock, a child was born to the couple on 04.01.2014. Thereafter, they separated. The father initiated HMOP.No.6 of 2016, on the file of the Family Court at Coimbatore. It was transferred, pursuant to an order of this Court and renumbered as HMOP.No.2609 of 2016, on the file of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Chennai. Later on, the said proceedings were withdrawn by the father.

6. Subsequently, the wife initiated HMOP.No.589 of 2019 on the file of the Subordinate Court at Poonamallee. The petition was allowed exparte on 23.12.2020. Pursuant to the grant of divorce, the parties have moved on. Both of them have contracted their second marriage.

7. The dispute now pertains to the custody of the child born to the couple in the year 2014. The father, pleading that he is in a position to bring the child up as a good person in the society, sought for guardianship of his minor son. This proceedings was numbered as GWOP.No.112 of 2022 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge at Thiruvallur. Summons were served on the mother. She has also filed a detailed counter.

8. Pending the disposal of the GWOP, the father took out an application in I.A.No.2 of 2023 seeking interim custody of the child for a period of 15 days in the month of May and also for custody of the child whenever long vacations intervene and also for permission to speak with the child, every Sunday and Wednesday, between 7 pm and 7.30 pm, over the mobile phone.

9. The mother filed an application in I.A.No.3 of 2023, seeking an order under Section 24 of the Guardians and Wards Act, to direct the father to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- per month as monthly maintenance and Rs.1,00,000/- towards litigation expenses. She pleaded that the child is studying in a pre-eminent institution in the city of Chennai and with great difficulty, she is paying the school fees and other expenses for the child. She pointed out that the father is having three properties in Coimbatore, Erode and Bangalore and that his monthly income is about Rs.1,60,000/-. She pointed out that the father is doing real estate business and has a horiculture estate in Kothagiri, Udagamandalam. Hence, she pleaded that the father will have to bear, at least, 50% of the expenses of the child. She further stated that the husband has not spent a single paisa towards the expenses of the child for the past ten years. She contended that in order to avoid any claim that may be made by her on the property, the father has transferred his assets in favour of her father in law.

10. This petition was resisted by the father stating that he is ready to pay any reasonable expenses for the child. He pleaded that the amounts sought for by the wife in the petition is excessive and arbitrary. Further, he stated that if custody of the child is handed over to him, he will not claim any share from the mother towards the expenses of the child.

11. The learned Trial Judge considered both the contentions and allowed the application for interim maintenance directing the father to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month, from the date of application till the date of disposal of the main GWOP. Insofar as I.A.No.2 of 2023 filed for interim custody is concerned, the learned Trial Judge dismissed th