The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes, and expeditious disposal of custody petitions is essential to safeguard the child's best interests.

Amit Rawal, J.

Petitioner-husband is aggrieved of the impugned order dated 09.03.2015 of Guardian Judge, Ludhiana, whereby, an application seeking interim custody of the child from mother, has been dismissed while according visiting rights.

2. Mr. Arun Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Abhishek Dhull, Advocate submits that marriage between husband and wife, i.e., petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 10.12.2006. On 19.01.2008, a male child, namely, Vivan Maini was born. As per the case set out in a petition under Section 25 of Guardian and Wards Act, originally filed at Ludhiana and thereafter, transferred at Hoshiarpur, when the child was 6 years old, wife along with child left the matrimonial home and started residing at Hoshiarpur. He submits that during the period the child remained at Ludhiana, achieved many accolades as he had participated in all the competitions and stood first, second, in essence had been coming out with flying colours either it be Tricycle Race, Fancy Dress, Hindi and English Poetry, Biscuits Race, Solo Dance, Run for Fun, Alphabet Race, Story Telling, Competition of Best of Waste, Sorting Competition, Clay Modeling, Rabbit Race, Colouring, Quiz, Conversation Competition, Hurdle Race, Talk to Rock, Basket Ball, Cap Chase, Rubbish to Furnish, Tongue Twister, Memory Game, Self Intro, Tease the Brain, Touch and Feel, Marshal Art, Long Jump etc. He was studying in one of the best schools in Ludhiana, i.e. Jesus Sacred Heat School. The school certificates in this regard are annexed as Annexure P-2 (colly). He further submits that maternal uncle of minor child, i.e., brother of the respondent is involved in an FIR bearing No.109 dated 24.08.2014 registered with P.S. Sadar Hoshiarpur registered under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for possessing 7 grams heroin (diacetylmorphine). In fact, he is drug addict and maternal grand father of the child, i.e., father of the respondent is suffering from Tuberculosis and is under constant treatment. The diseases Tuberculosis is a communicative, thus, there is every apprehension that it may not be contracted by minor child. The atmosphere in the house at Hoshiarpur is not congenial and suitable for the child and it would seriously affect his upbringing, approach to life and schooling, much less, studies. The child at such tender age imbibes culture, habits, day-to-day routine being followed in the house, whereas, the petitioner, who, is having a business of ready made garments at Mall Road, Ludhiana and has sufficient means not only to take care of the child but had an arrangement for upbringing of the child. There would not be any impediment hindrance in his studies which he had been pursuing in the aforementioned school. Ludhiana is A class city vis-a-vis Hoshiarpur. Though the trial Court declined the relief of interim custody but granted the visiting rights to meet the minor in the chamber of the counsel for a period of two hours from 2.00 p.m to 4.00 p.m and the taxi and other travelling expenses for the said purpose will be borne by the petitioner. Even the aforementioned directions have not been complied with and a contempt petition, in this regard, is stated to be pending. He further submits that no doubt, welfare of the child is prime importance and it is also essential and necessary that the custody of the child at the present age of 8 years old can be with either of the parents. Continuous stay of the child with the mother may not hinder his development or change his attitude or interest/love and affection for the petitioner. Whereas, in every likelihood that respondent may pollute the mind and tutor the child against the petitioner. In fact, there is no healthy environment at Hoshiarpur, thus, urges this Court for setting aside of the impugned order and further his client is not averse to extending the visiting rights to the respondent on any terms and conditions which this Court may deem it appropriate.

3. Mr.