JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner challenges Ext.P3 order of the learned Family Court, Thiruvalla, in IA No.1/2025 in OP(G&W)No.539/2025 because, she had been given custody over her children only during the weekends.

2. Smt.Lekshmi S.Nair – learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that no cogent reason had engaged the attention of the learned Family Court, to have denied her client the request for interim custody of her children, but to be confined only to weekends; and hence that the impugned order is in error.

3. Smt.Swapna Vijayan – learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the learned Family Court has correctly relied upon an Agreement between the parties, wherein, the permanent custody of the children has been handed over by the petitioner to the respondent. She argued that, when such an Agreement is in force, the petitioner could not have approached this Court to challenge Ext.P3, because the said order is edificed exclusively on its terms.

4. Even when we hear Smt.Swapna Vijayan on the afore lines, we are cognizant that the parties had earlier filed a joint petition for divorce, which had been then allowed; however, concededly, the ord