IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.202499 OF 2024 (GW/WC)

BETWEEN:

SMT. SHRUTHI D/O SHANTAPPA NEELUR, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: PVT SERVICE, R/O C/O: SHIVASHANKAR NEELUR, H.NO.132/4C, AIWAN-SHAHI QUARTER, KALABURAGI-585103.

…APPELLANT (BY SMT/KUM. SWATI M. N., ADV., FOR SMT. GEETA ANNARAO SAJJANSHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

BASAWARAJ S/O SHANKARPPA PATIL, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE, R/O: H.NO.1-149/101/3/16, GROUND FLOOR, KOTAMBARI LAYOUT, SHAKTI NAGAR, KALABURAGI-585103.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVINDRA H. BABALESHWAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47 (A) OF GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.04.2023 PASSED BY THE PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, KALABURAGI IN G AND W.C.NO.05/2022 AND THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2024 PASSED IN E.P.NO.29/2023 PASSED BY THE PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT, AT KALABURAGI BY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF HOURS AS WELL AS THE VISITATION TO BE VIA-VIDEO CALL AND NOT IN PERSON, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN)

This appeal is filed by the appellant – wife under Section 47 (A) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred as ‘G & W Act’) by challenging the order of the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Kalaburagi in G & W.C.No.5/2022 dated 20.04.2023, which is filed by the respondent – husband under Section 10 of the G & W Act for granting the custody of the minor child – Bhimshmagouda Patil and for visitation right and also the order passed in Civil E.P.No.29/2023 dated 20.01.2024 wherein the Prl. Judge, Addl. Family Court, Kalaburagi, has rejected the objection filed by the appellant - wife.

02. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent and perused the records.

03. The case of the appellant - wife is that the respondent - husband filed a petition under Section 10 of the G & W. Act, for seeking custody of the minor child, alternatively seeking visitation right. It is alleged that the marriage of the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 06.05.2013. Out of their wedlock, the child was born on 01.05.2014. Due to dispute arose between the parties, the husband has filed a petition in M.C.No.122/2016 seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which was allowed. The appellant – wife has filed maintenance petition in Crl.Misc.No.69/2016, which was allowed. Thereafter, finally they have filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent. A mutual divorce has been granted by the Family Court. The respondent – husband also said to be paying the maintenance to the wife and child. The custody of the child was not given to the respondent - husband. Hence, he has filed a petition for custody of the child and visitation right.

04. The appellant - wife herein being the respondent before the Family Court has objected the petition contending that the respondent - husband has addicted to the bad habits like alcohol, gambling etc., It is not possible to give the child for custody to the husband.

Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

05. After hearing the arguments and analyzing the evidence of the respondent – husband, the Family Court vide impugned order dated 20.04.2023 though rejected the custody of the child, but granted the visiting right to the respondent - husband to see the child on every 2^nd and 4^th Sunday from 11:00 a.m. till 4:00 p.m. in the office of the CDPO, at Kalaburagi till the child attains the age of majority.

06. It is further case of the respondent - husband that subsequent to passing of the order, the appellant - wife not produced the child at the CDPO Office, Kalaburagi for complying the visitation rights. Therefore, the respondent - husband c