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

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 6675

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J, Dr, Kauser Edappagath, J
NAFEESATH SANA – Appellant
Versus
MUHAMMADKUNHI P.M – Respondent
Mat.Appeal/405/2019



Advocates:
SMT.SREEJA SOHAN K.SMT.R.REJI, SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA, SRI.K.ABDUL NASSAR

In child custody cases, the child's welfare is the primary consideration, and gradual integration with the non-custodial parent is permissible.

Headnote:

Custody - Child Custody Agreement - Maintenance Provisions - Custody Arrangement Summary

Fact of the Case:

The appellant mother appeals against a lower court ruling granting temporary custody of her six-year-old son to the father. A previous agreement stipulated custody terms and maintenance payments from the father.

Finding of the Court:

The court prioritized the welfare of the child, allowing the father to have controlled interactions leading to potential custody while ensuring maintenance obligations are met.

Issues: Whether the father should have custody of the child despite the previous agreement and allegations of non-payment of maintenance.

Ratio Decidendi: The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration; the court allowed for scheduled interactions to facilitate father-child bonding before any custody changes.

Final Decision: The appeal is disposed of allowing scheduled interactions with the father and maintaining the mother's custody until further review.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of March 2021 A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The dispute in this appeal is in regard to the custody of the child. The mother of the child is before us. The respondent divorced her and he remarried. In the wedlock, a male child was born and his name is Nabhan. The child is now only six years old. The parties entered into an agreement and based on the agreement that the marriage was dissolved. It was agreed that the child will be in the custody of the mother till he attains majority. The father has already agreed to pay maintenance to the child at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month. There was a further stipulation in the agreement that the father and his parents will have the right to see the child and have the custody of the child for one or two days in a month and also for attending any function in the house of the father.

2. The respondent / father moved application for the custody of the child and that was allowed in accordance with the terms and conditions agreed to in the agreement. It is challenging this, the mother / appellant has approached this Court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that father fails to provide maintenance to the child and therefore appellant shall not be directed to comply with the conditions in the agreement.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent / father submits that he used to provide maintenance as agreed.

6. The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration for this Court as the child is now only six years old. It may be necessary for the child to familiarize with the father for sometime before having the custody as agreed to in the agreement. Taking note of the tender age of the child, we are of the view that father can be permitted to interact with the child twice in a month through video calls. Father is allowed to contact the child through Whatsapp (No.9061366062) on fortnight Saturday between 07.00pm to 07.30pm. This arrangement will continue for a period of two years. Thereafter, the father can be given custody on Saturday evening till the following Sunday 05.00pm in every month. The venue of the handing over and return of the child shall be the house of the appellant. The respondent has agreed to pay maintenance at the rate Rs.3,000/- per month. If there is any default in paying the maintenance, the mother can seek enforcement of the order through the Family Court.

With the observations and directions as above, the appeal is disposed of.

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

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