Visitation rights under Hindu Marriage Act prioritize child's welfare in parental disputes.

O R D E R

Challenging the order passed by the Sub Court, Pollachi in IA.No.3 of 2024 in HMOP.No.91 of 2024 in and by which the learned Judge had permitted the respondent/husband from taking his minor daughter on the 1^st and the 3^rd Saturday of every month and keeping her in his custody from 10 a.m to 6 p.m., the wife is the petitioner before this Court.

2. Admittedly, the respondent/husband had filed HMOP.No.91 of

2023 seeking dissolution of marriage between himself and the petitioner/wife on the ground cruelty.

3. The petitioner/wife has filed counter in which she would submit that the respondent/husband is only having his eyes on the property but not on the welfare of the child and the wife and that at the behest of his parents he is not showing any love and affection either to the petitioner or to his daughter. However, it is seen that the petitioner/wife had filed a suit for partition in OS.No.1065/2022 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore against the respondent/husband and his father claiming a share for and on behalf of minor daughter.

4. Pending, OP proceedings the respondent/husband has taken out an application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act , 1955 seeking visitation rights to see his daughter. The respondent/husband would submit that he lives close to the petitioner's house and his daughter is already familiar with him and his parents and that he was visiting her at the petitioner's house. However, with the passing of time the petitioner/wife and her family members had started ill treating him and on one occasion had not even opened the door to see his daughter. The respondent/husband would submit that he has not been part of the child's ear piercing and tonsure ceremony as he was not informed about the same and the petitioner/wife's intent is to alienate him from his daughter. Therefore, he had sought to have the visitation right.

5. A counter statement has been filed by the petitioner/wife denying the allegations.

6. The learned Sub Judge, Pollachi by her order dated 13.02.2025 had allowed the application permitting the respondent/father from taking his minor daughter on the 1^st and the 3^rd Saturday of every month and keeping her in his custody from 10 a.m to 6 p.m. Challenging the same the petitioner/wife is before this Court.

7. Heard the counsels on either side and perused the records.

7. The dispute appears to be only between the parents and for a wholesome growth the child requires both the parents. Admittedly, the respondent/husband stays close to the petitioner's house and his attempt is only to establish contact with his daughter which in the interest of the minor child is very essential. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife would submit that the father has not been making any payments towards maintenance. However, no application has been filed seeking maintenance though the HMOP has been pending since 2023 and this issue has not been raised in the counter as well. Therefore, in the given circumstances, the order passed by the learned Sub Court, Judge, Pollachi is in the interest of the child and I seen no reason to interfere with the same.

8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.