COMMON ORDER :

The Civil Revision Petition No.843 of 2022 is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 25-03-2022 dismissing the petition in I.A.No.417 of 2020 in F.C.O.P.No.254 of 2019 on the file of Family Court-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, which was filed under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, by the G.P.A holder to grant visiting rights of the minor girl Hitansi Prasad to the petitioner.

The Civil Revision Petition No.844 of 2022 is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 25-03-2022 dismissing the petition in I.A.No.414 of 2020 in F.C.O.P.No.254 of 2019 on the file of Family Court-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, which was filed under Section 26 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, by the G.P.A holder to protect the minor female baby girl Hitansi Prasad from dislocating from the jurisdiction of the Court.

2. Originally, the father of the revision petitioner filed F.C.O.P No.254 of 2019, but later the petitioner got represented by his father who is his G.P.A holder. The relief claimed in the main petition is to grant permanent custody of the minor female child to the petitioner.

3. The case of the petitioner is shortly as follows : The respondent is his wife. The respondent joined him immediately after the marriage, but later she accompanied the petitioner to Australia where the petitioner was doing business. After stay of six months, they returned to India and stayed in the house of the petitioner, but she did not mingle with in-laws and after return to Australia. At the encouragement of the petitioner, the respondent got job in Australia. Later, the respondent returned to India in July, 2013 for attending the wedding of her cousin and thereafter did not return to Australia and join the petitioner. The mother of the respondent made accusative phone calls. The father of the respondent covered up. Again the petitioner and the respondent came to India in 2014 to attend his cousin’s marriage. The respondent was in the 5th month pregnancy. The petitioner wanted the delivery of the child in India. She nagged him for leaving her in India. A female child was born on 16.10.2014 in Vijayawada. During her stay in Australia, she threatened to commit suicide if he did not do as per her commands. Since December, 2017 till 02.03.2018, the petitioner personally and through the elders persuaded the respondent to join him. The respondent did not reply to the phone calls made by the petitioner on 02.03.2018. There was issuance of notice on 16.03.2018 by the petitioner to the respondent to join him. After receipt of the notice, the respondent reluctantly joined with the family of the petitioner along with baby. However, she neglected the family and had arguments with the petitioner’s family members even on trivial issues. On 30.05.2018 the respondent left the house with the child from the back door without giving intimation to the petitioner’s family members. When they were about to go to the police station, they got a phone call from her maternal uncle. The respondent is working in a lab in an engineering college and neglecting well being of the child. Since, the petitioner is working abroad and has every means to maintain the child, he is ready to take the minor child and his father who is very much free to take care of the minor would help in her education and caring. As such, the petitioner seeks the relief in the main petition and also the interim application filed for visiting rights and also for not to dislocate her.

4. The main petition as well as the interlocutory applications were resisted by the respondent by filing detailed counters.

5. The respondent claimed that the petitions are counter blast to the respondent’s application to the competent authority in Australia for renewal of the passport of the daughter which expired in April, 2020. The child has been with her since the birth and attached to her. The frivolous p