JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order of the learned Family Court, Chavara, because her request for custody of her minor child during the time she is in India has been rejected.

2. Sri.Bharath Mohan – learned counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that the parties had earlier entered into a compromise - based on which, OP(G&W)No.235/2021 had been disposed of - wherein his client had been agreed to be in interim custody of her child whenever she reaches India. The learned counsel explained that, in contravention of this, the child was not given to his client; and hence that she moved the learned Family Court with an application, namely, IA No.21/2025 in OP(G&W)No.235/2021; but which has now been dismissed.

3. Sri.Joseph George – learned counsel for the respondent, in response, submitted that his client has no intention of creating any controversy; but that he was unable to accede to the request of the petitioner only because she had not informed him of her arrival in India. He added that, if she discloses before this Court how long she is going to be in India, he has no objection to the child being with her, provided her schooling is not disturbed.

4.