JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner alleges that his seven year old son has been taken away against his wishes by the 8^th respondent – his mother, to Ajman, United Arab Emirates (UAE).

2. We do not propose to enter into the rival contentions at this stage because, we had an interaction with the parties, who had appeared along with the child on 23.01.2026. The impressions we gathered through such exercise, are available in the order we indited on the said date, which is as under: The parties are before us today and the child was produced before us by the 8^th respondent.

2. We had an interaction with the child and he came across as being very articulate, amiable, cherubic and smart. He had equal affection for the parents, but appeared confused on account of the strife between them.

3. We allow the parties to talk to each other along with the child; and after about two hours, we interacted with them again.

4. The parties agreed that until the next posting date, the child can be with the father and that they will appear again, so that they can either think of mediation or inform this Court about any settlement they can obtain in the meanwhile.

5. List this case, therefore, on

28.01