BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 11.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

and

CMP(MD) No.19347 of 2025

Sakthishree ... Petitioner

Vs

Satheeshkumar ... Respondent

PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records and to set aside the Ex and fair order passed in I.A.No.11 of 2025 in GWOP.No.18 of 2018 on the

file of the Family Judge of Karur dated 24-09-2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohamed Sherbudeen

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suresh

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed, challenging the order

passed in I.A.No.11 of 2025 in GWOP.No.18 of 2018 on the file of the

learned Judge, Family Court, Karur, dated 24.09.2025.

2.The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 19.02.2016. Due to misunderstanding between them, they are living separately. The respondent filed a petition in HMOP.NO.351 of 2018 before Family Court, Karur, for dissolution of marriage and had filed a petition in GWOP.No.18 of 2018 before the Family Court, Karur, seeking for the custody of the minor child, namely, Kavin Pranav.

3.The learned Judge, Family Court, Karur, vide order dated

21.12.2020, had dismissed the said petition, granting visitation rights to the respondent once in a month on all first Sundays at Pasupatheeswarar Temple, Karur, commencing from 08.00 am., and ending at 08.00 pm., 4.The respondent has subsequently filed an application in I.A.No.

11 of 2025 to get modification order to witness his child in all weekend (Sunday) and holidays. The said application was allowed, permitting the respondent to witness the minor child on every Sunday in Kalyanapasupathiswarar Temple, Karur from 10.00 am., to 12 noon in the presence of Advocate Commissioner, namely, P.Santhanam.

Aggrieved over the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

5.The learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the memorandum of grounds and called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order.

6.The learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is entitled for visitation rights over the child and he has been denied from having the child. He would further submit that the respondent's love and affection should not be detrimented or curtailed for two hours on Sundays. Hence, he prays for modification of the impugned order.

7.This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the materials placed on record.

8.The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 19.02.2016 and out of the wedlock, the petitioner gave birth to a male child, namely, Kavin Pranav. Due to difference of opinion, the petitioner and the respondent are living separately. The respondent/husband has filed the application for divorce and has also filed an application to get modification order to witness the child in all weekend (Sunday) and holidays. The trial Court had allowed the said application, granting visitation rights to the respondent on every Sunday between 10.00 am., and 12.00 pm. As against the order of the trial Court, the petitioner/wife is before this Court.

9.The main grievance of the petitioner is that as the child is suffering from Autism and is in need of special care, medication, speech therapy and other aspects about the welfare of the child, the respondent could not maintain the child properly.

10.The apprehension of the petitioner is unwarranted, since the visitation of the child is fixed on Sunday only. However, considering the age of the child and the fact that the respondent's love and affection should not be detrimented or curtailed by denying his rights of visitation only for two hours that too on Sunday alone, the above contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the child is suffering from Autism and requires of special care, medication and speech therapy and that the respondent/father could not maintain the child properly, by itself will not invalidate the true love and affection. Acc