Interim orders regarding child custody do not equate to final rulings and can be modified based on changing circumstances.

JUDGMENT

T.R.RAVI, J The respondent in I.A. No. 2 of 2020 in O.P. No. 436 of

2020 on the files of the Family Court, Palakkad has filed this Original Petition challenging the order dated 03.11.2020 in an interim application seeking custody of a minor child. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 21.06.2011 and a boy child named Vidhul Vineeth was born in the wedlock on 23.06.2015. The petitioner and the respondent started living separately from 03.04.2019. According to the respondent, the petitioner used to take the child along with him to his residence as mutually agreed between the parents. But, however, he had taken child on 10.03.2020 and not returned the child stating reasons of lock-down etc.

The petitioner contended that the respondent was not looking after the child after 10.03.2020 and since she was working by staying at her paternal house, she was not in a position to look after the child and had hence, entrusted the child with the petitioner. The Family Court, Palakkad by Ext.P4 order dated 03.11.2020 allowed the interim application. The Court granted interim custody of the child to the respondent. The petitioner was directed to hand over the custody to the mother and after such handing over, the petitioner has been allowed custody of the child for a period of three days from 2.00 pm of the Fridays preceding the second Saturdays till 2.00 pm of the Mondays succeeding the second Saturdays, every month. Consequential directions regarding the manner of production of the child and return of the child were also issued. It was also specifically stated that if the respondent declines to permit the petitioner to have temporary custody, the petitioner will be at liberty to approach the Family Court for enforcing the said portion of the order. The petitioner/father has challenged the above directions mainly on the contention that the interim order will virtually amount to the final relief. We are not in a position to agree with the Counsel for the petitioner. The order only stipulates temporary arrangements and does not finally disposed of the matter as contended. Sufficient safeguards have been made in the order in order to ensure that the petitioner/father also gets custody of the child for three days during every month and in case, the said direction is violated by the respondent, it is open for the petitioner to approach the Family Court seeking remedial measures. The nature of the directions would itself clearly show that they are only temporary in nature and the remedy of the petitioner to approach the Court for modification is not in any way affected. We do not find any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the interim order passed by the Family Court, Palakkad warranting an interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India .

The Original Petition fails and is dismissed. We, however hasten to add that the Family court, Palakkad should not, in any way, be influenced by the findings and observations, recorded for the purpose of granting interim custody, while it is disposing of the original petition finally. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 DATED 9/7/2020, TRUE COPY OF O.P.NO.436 OF

2020, ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P2 DATED 9/7/2020, TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.2 OF

2020 IN O.P.NO.436 OF 2020 OF THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P3 DATED 8/9/2020, TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER TO I.A.NO.2 OF 2020 IN O.P.NO.436 OF 2020, ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P4 DATED 3/11/2020, TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2020 IN O.P.NO.436 OF 2020, ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.