O.P.No.610 of 2020

O.P.No.610 of 2020 and

A.No.3180 of 2020

P.VELMURUGAN.,J

This Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to grant permanent

custody of his minor child namely Anirudh Shankar, who born on 08.08.2011.

2. Petitioner and respondent are the father and mother of the minor child

Anirudh Shankar respectively.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/father submitted that his marriage

with the respondent was solemnized on 10.05.2010. Due to dispute and

misunderstanding, the respondent/wife left the matrimonial home and residing

in her parent's home. Allegation made by the petitioner against the respondent

is that the respondent is an employee and so the child is with her mother at the

day time and she could not concentrate on the child during week days. The

respondent and her family members have blocked every access of the petitioner

to his son. The respondent is preventing the child from seeing the petitioner.

During week days, the child was left alone with respondent's mother, who is a

TB patient. The respondent hardly spent only two hours time with the child

during night time, after returning from work. The petitioner was not permitted

to see the child even in the school, as per the instructions of the respondent.

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.P.No.610 of 2020

4. The respondent/mother has filed the counter affidavit and denied all

the allegations made by the petitioner/father. The respondent/wife was forced to

leave the matrimonial home due to threatening behavior of the

petitioner/husband. She is the one who has taken care of her child. With great

difficulty, she obtained admission in a reputed school for her child. The

petitioner has not contributed any money towards the education of the child.

The petitioner did not spend adequate time with the child. She never prevented

the petitioner from meeting the minor son.

5. Admittedly, the respondent/mother had admitted her son in Padma

Seshadri Bala Bhavan School, T.Nagar. Now, the age of the minor son is 10

years. Petitioner's father and mother are aged persons and even the petitioner

himself stated in the Original Petition is that his parents are aged. The

petitioner alone has to take care of his parents. The respondent/wife insisted the

petitioner to have separate house and accommodation. Since he wanted to look

after his parents, he refused to do the same. Hence the respondent/mother left

the matrimonial home with the minor child.

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.P.No.610 of 2020

6. The main allegation of the petitioner/father is that the

respondent/mother is not taking care of the child and she is a working woman

and she is going to work even before the minor son wakes up from bed. She

would hardly spend only two hours per day with the child and no parental care

has been taken by the respondent/mother. She did not properly feed the child.

Except the petitioner/father, no other witnesses were examined. The

respondent/wife totally denied the averments made in the petition. The fact

remains that now the child is with respondent/mother. Admittedly, the child is

residing in K.K.Nagar along with his mother. The minor child is also studying

in one of the reputed schools in the said locality and with great difficult,

admission was obtained in the said school.

7. Further, even as per law, the Hindu Minority and Guardians Act and

Guardians and Wards Act, both the mother and father are the natural guardians

to the child. The respondent/mother has clearly stated that she is a working

woman, she is taking care of her child and she is giving all care to her child.

She used to go to office only at 9 ' o clock in the morning after sending the child

to the school and comes back at 5.30 pm. The petitioner/father has alleged that

the respondent left the matrimonial home and she is not taking care of her

mother and her child also and not even all