2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 20018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.09.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN CRP.No. 2846 of 2023 ---
P.A. Shahabudeen … Petitioner Versus Arshiya Banu .. Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, prays to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 04.03.2023 passed in IA.No. 2 of 2022 in IA.No. 1 of 2019 in GWOP.No. 1812 of
2018 on the file of the Additional Principal Family Court, Coimbatore.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Moghan For Respondent : Mr.V.S. Venkatesh For Mr.K.Balasubramanian -----
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 04.03.2023 passed in IA.No. 2 of 2022 in IA.No. 1 of 2019 in G.W.O.P.No. 1812 of 2018 on the file of the Additional Principal Family Court, Coimbatore.
2. The case of the petitioner/husband is that the petitioner has filed G.W.O.P.No. 1812 of 2018 under Section 25 of the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890, directing the respondent/wife to hand over the custody of the minor child, namely, Maheera of the petitioner to the father. During the pendency of the petition, the revision petitioner/husband has filed IA.No. 1 of 2019 in G.W.O.P.No. 1812 of 2018 under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act, to produce the child and grant visitation rights to visit the child every week end (from Friday evening to Monday morning) till the disposal of the case. After perusing the records, the Court below allowed the application by order dated 22.07.2022 by granting visitation right to the petitioner permitting him to meet his daughter Maheera during the first Saturday of every month between 11.00 a.m to 1.00 p.m. in the Court premises, Coimbatore. If the 1st Saturday falls on any holiday, then the petitioner/father was permitted to meet his daughter on the next working Saturday. It is further clarified that the respondent/mother of the child is permitted to remain with the child and the petitioner shall not provide anything without the consent of the respondent and he shall not take anybody with him during the said visit and he should not do anything harmful to his daughter. The parties are at liberty to approach the Court for any modification of this order if the same is required. Aggrieved by the said order, the revision petitioner has filed I.A.No. 2 of 2022 in IA.No.1 of 2010 in G.W.O.P.No. 1812 of 2018 under Section 151 CPC seeking to grant an order to modify the said visitation order to allow the petitioner to meet his minor child without the presence of the respondent/mother next to them and without her supervision and surveillance. After analysing the records, the Court below dismissed by order dated 04.03.2023. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has come forward with the present Civil Revision Petition.
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent/wife stating that it is false statement the minor female child is now under the forcible custody of the respondent only from the year 2013 onwards. The true fact is that after taking away the minor child maheera forcibly, the respondent was thrown away from the matrimonial home by the petitioner and he had broken the neck of the child under intoxication. It was therefore, the mother had approached this Court through HCP.No. 299 of 2014, the same was restored the custody of the child to the mother. Despite filing a suit for divorce, the petitioner visited the respondent's home frequently to harass her and also on several occasions, he disturbed the minor child and her education by visiting her school. Further, there is no possibility for the shared parenting as the petitioner is a criminal with various cases pending against him. Even since the interim order passed by the Court to spend the time with the minor, the minor child is mentally affected a lot and the minor is not mentally and physically prepared to be with the petitioner even for a moment. It is false to state that there was an influence and abnormal presser on the minor when the minor was brought to the Court to obey the visitation order. It is false to say, due to the respondent's adamant and inconsistent act, the minor was not under her free will and the statement of the petitioner that the minor was not in a comfortable mind and mentally are false. It is right for the mother to be with the child and there is no necessity to modify the present visiting right so as to grant further or much more time for the petitioner to be with the child. Therefore, the above Civil Revision Petition has to be dismissed.
4. He