Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 36304
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AMIT RAWAL, K. V. Jayakumar, JJ
BIJAY RAJ MENON – Appellant
Versus
ARATHY RAMACHANDRAN – Respondent
OP (FC) 682/2024
K.M.ANEESH, ADARSH KUMAR, SHASHANK DEVAN, RAHUL SUNIL, JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL)
The court prioritized the welfare of the children in custody arrangements, allowing visitation rights while addressing concerns regarding parental intentions.
Headnote:(A) Family Law - Custody of Children - The court considered the welfare and paramount interest of the children in granting interim custody arrangements. The petitioner was allowed visitation rights and video call interactions with the children, while the respondent raised concerns regarding the father's intentions and character. (Paras 1, 5, 8, 11)
(B) Divorce Proceedings - The court noted the ongoing divorce petition and the need for counseling to address the couple's issues. The arrangement for custody was made with conditions to ensure the children's well-being. (Paras 2, 4, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought interim custody of his two children, aged eight and two, while the respondent filed for divorce and raised concerns about the father's character and intentions. The court emphasized the importance of maintaining the children's relationship with both parents.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed interim custody to the father with specific conditions, ensuring the children's welfare and interaction with both parents.
Issues: The main issues included the father's request for overnight custody and the mother's concerns regarding the father's character and intentions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the welfare of the children is paramount, allowing for visitation and interaction while addressing the concerns raised by the mother.
Result: Petition stands disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. welfare of children paramount (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT
Amit Rawal, J.
Present petition is directed against the impugned order dated7.10.2024 in interlocutory application No.2 of 2024 preferred by the petitioner-husband who is respondent in OP (G&W) No.1185 of 2024 seeking permanent custody of children, whereby overnight interim custody of the children has been rejected with a permission to the petitioner to visit the children and to interact with them from 10.00 am to 1.30 pm on second Saturdays of every month in the premises of the trial court with a further liberty to interact with the children through video calls from 7.00pm to 7.20 pm (IST) on all Saturdays, except second Saturdays.
2. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent-wife has also filed a Divorce Petition bearing OP No.1663 of 2024.
3. Noticing the predicament of the parties, we had on8.11.2024, and 14.11.2024 passed the following orders:
Order dated 8.11.2024:
Inter alia alleges that this Court vide order dated 08.07.2024 disposed of OP(FC)No.397/2024 in the following terms:
“a. The respondent - wife is hereby ordered to allow the petitioner - husband custody of the children on Saturdays and Sundays for the next two weeks, namely on 13.07.2024 and 14.07.2024; and on 20.07.2024 and 21.07.2024.
b. For the afore, the exchange of the children shall be at 10 a.m. on Saturday and 5.00 p.m. on Sunday both at the Radio Park, Thiruvananthapuram, which place has been suggested by both sides.”
2.Sri.Aneesh.K.M., learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that an application was filed for interim custody of two children, aged eight(8) and two(2) years. However, the learned Family Court rejected the overnight custody without considering the fact that the petitioner who is working abroad come to India especially to interact with the children. In fact, he often comes to India only to meet the children and is willing to stay for the period of custody granted.
3.Issue notice before admission through special messenger to the respondent as well as counsel in the trial court.
4.Petitioner especially came to India to meet the children and therefore prays for interim custody. The question of interim custody will be considered after effecting service. Post this matter on 12.11.2024.
Order dated 14.11.2024
The present petition is directed against the interim order of the learned Family Court dated 07.10.2024 whereby the interim application bearing No.2 of 2024 preferred by the petitioner – husband aged forty one(41) years for having the interim custody of minor children ie., daughter and son, namely Ashwika Bijay Raj and Avyukth Arathy Bijay aged eight(8) years and two(2) years respectively, for a period of fifteen(15) days has been rejected in the following manner:
1. This petition is filed for interim custody of two children named Aashwikaa Bijay Raj and Avyukth Arathy Bijay aged 8 years and 2 years respectively.
2. Petitioner argues that the respondent is not permitting him to visit and interact with the children. He is working in Singapore. He stated that he took a house in Trivandrum and he is ready to come down to visit his children for 15 days in a month.
3. The respondent contended that the petitioner did not show any respect or concern for his wife and children. She raised several allegations against the petitioner about his habits and character.
4. I perused the records and interacted with the children. The elder child aged 8 years and the younger child is aged only 2 years. Considering their age, I do not find that it will be proper to give overnight custody of the children to the petitioner at this stage. At the same time, I find it necessary to give sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to interact with his children.
5. Considering the welfare and paramount interest of the children, and considering the fact that the petitioner is working in Singapore, I permit the petitioner to visit and interact with the children f
