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

2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 2844

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J
Ram Nithin Baalay S/o.late Bhoomarajam Baalay – Appellant
Versus
Megha Bordoloi D/o.mridul Kumar Bordolo – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.27355 OF 2024 (GM-FC)



Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :MS.DEEPA J., ADVOCATE
For the Respondent:SMT.GEETHA DEVI M.P., ADVOCATE

The welfare of the child is paramount in custody cases, necessitating shared parenting to foster healthy relationships with both parents.

Headnote:(A) Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Custody and visitation rights - The petitioner-father challenged the Family Court's interim order granting limited visitation rights to him while denying equal custody during vacations. The court emphasized the paramount importance of the child's welfare and the need for shared parenting. (Paras 6, 7, 10, 12)

(B) Child Welfare - The court recognized that the child's emotional and psychological attachment to the mother must be balanced with the father's rights to foster a healthy relationship. (Paras 7, 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner-father sought equal custody and visitation rights for his minor child during vacations, arguing that the Family Court's order was arbitrary and did not consider the child's best interests. The respondent-mother contended that the child, being very young, was emotionally attached to her and that the existing visitation rights were sufficient.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Family Court's order did not adequately consider the need for shared parenting and the child's welfare. The court allowed the father's petition, granting him equal custody and visitation rights during vacations.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner-father was entitled to equal custody and visitation rights during vacations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the welfare of the child is paramount and emphasized the importance of shared parenting, allowing the father to have equal time with the child during vacations.

Result: The petition filed by the petitioner-father is allowed, and the Family Court's order is set aside.

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner-father of the minor child challenging the interim order dated 01.10.2024 passed on IA.No.15 in G & W No.03/2022 by II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru.

2. The respondent-mother had initiated a petition for custody and guardianship of the minor child in G & WC.No.3/2022 against the petitioner-father. In the said proceedings before the Family Court, IA.No.15 came to be filed by the petitioner-father seeking 50% of the custody and visitation rights of the minor child during all Summer, Winter, Diwali and Dasara vacations and any other vacations which the School declares every year.

3. The said application, on contest by the respondent-mother, came to be partly allowed by granting visitation rights; the Family Court granted the visitation rights to the father during Dasara, Diwali, Winter and Summer vacations for continuous three days either in the first half or second half of vacations after discussion with the wife from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. It was also ordered that the petitioner-father shall not take his minor son out of Bengaluru and consequently, other orders were passed with regard to safety, security and welfare of the minor child and for co-operation during the visitation rights. Hence, the petitioner-father has questioned the said order in this petition.

4. It is vehemently contended by learned counsel for petitioner-father that the impugned order passed by the Family Court is arbitrary or one sided, which is against the principles of the child parenting rights and welfare and wellbeing of the minor child. It is contended by learned counsel that the minor child is presently aged 4 years and he is going to a Day Care Centre and it is equally essential for the father to have the child custody and visitation rights for proper growth and development of the minor child, physically, psychologically and mentally.

4.1 It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the father is a permanent resident of Hyderabad and mother is residing in Bengaluru along with the minor child. During the proceedings before the Family Court, the father has been travelling from Hyderabad to Bengaluru to visit the minor child and have visitation rights by spending huge amount during weekends and diligently following up all the visitation rights and going back to Hyderabad after spending two days with the minor child in Bengaluru, thereby she contends that the father is showing keen interest in taking care of welfare and well being of the minor child. When such being the case, it is also the requirement of the child to have the love, attention, care and close relationship with the father for proper growth and development in the formative and later years.

4.2 Learned counsel vehemently contends that in a child's custody case, the welfare of the child is primary importance and the equal child parenting time is required to be granted by the Court and it cannot be one sided by granting the entire custody to the mother and only few hours of visitation rights to the father, which does not augur well with the child parenting rights as per several judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court. Learned counsel further contends that these crucial aspects of co-parenting, shared parenting and equal custody and visitation rights to the father and the mother has been ignored by learned Family Judge, while passing the impugned order on IA.No.15.

4.3 It is further contended by learned counsel that the minor child is presently going to a Day Care Centre and the mother is unemployed. Therefore, in the interest of the minor child, he be handed over to the father during Summer, Winter, Diwali and Dasara vacations and any other vacations that is declared by the School, so that the father and the son could spend 50% vacations with each other for proper growth and development of the minor child. Learned counsel further contends that the father has been visiting the minor child and

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top