Father entitled to modified child visitation on non-school days, home visits, and festival access prioritizing welfare.

COMMON ORDER

Challenging the impugned common order passed in I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of

2024 in O.P.No.2871 of 2023 by the learned VII Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, the Revision Petitioner husband preferred these Civil Revision Petitions.

2. Before the trial court, the Revision Petitioner filed an application seeking temporary custody of their children Jessica Linda and Jayden Antony from every Saturday starting 10.00 a.m. to Sunday 07.00 p.m. or any other day. and also to allow him to speak with the children every alternate day between 04.00 .m. to 04.30.p.m. The said application was objected by the respondent wife and on hearing both sides, the trial judge has partly allowed the application by permitting the petitioner to visit their minor children twice a month (.i.e.) on the first and third Saturday of every month from 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon at the Child Care Centre attached to the Family Court, Chennai and to speak them through phone on every 1^st and 4^th Sunday between 04.00 p.m. to 04.30 p.m. Aggrieved over the said order, the revision petitioner husband had preferred these civil revision petitions.

3.The learned counsel for revision petitioner husband would submit that on the first and third Saturday, the school for the children is running. Therefore, he wanted to modify the same as second and fourth Saturday and also contended that aged parents wanted to live with the children. Therefore, on those days, he wanted to take the children to his home and he inclined to have the custody of the children between 10.00 a.m. to 04.00 p.m. on the second and fourth Saturday, probably they would not have any special class in the school on those days. So, he wanted to take children to his home, wherein aged father, 72 years old grandfather also wanted to join with the children. Before separation, all were lived in that house. Therefore, he prayed modification before the trial court, but it was not considered. Further, he wanted to speak with the children even daily, for which, he seeks modification. But, the trial court failed to consider the same. Hence, he prayed to set aside the findings of trial judge. 4. The learned counsel for respondent would submit that both children are studying in school and they felt very embarassing to see their father. At the most, as a father, as per the visitation right, he was granted permission by the trial court. However, he wanted to modify the order. Hence, she raised objections.

5.Considering both side submissions, the fact reveals that revision petitioner is the father of minor children, girl is aged 13 years and boy is aged 9 years. Both of them were studying in the school in the respective 8^th and 4^th Std. For the past 5 years, the revision petitioner and the respondent have got separated. Admittedly, children were in custody of respondent wife. Both were residing at Chennai. But, before separation, for nearly about 10 years all were living together at Korattur at the revision petitioner’s house. Now, as a father, he wanted to visit minor children. But the trial court has granted visitation right for first and second Saturday of every month. Admittedly, both days are working days. Therefore, he sought for modification. The reason assigned by the revision petitioner is justifiable one. Hence, this court is inclined to modify condition instead of first and second Saturday, the second and fourth Sunday of every month is ordered to be permitted to visit minor children.

6. Apart from that, the revision petitioner husband also wanted to have the children in festival days, more particularly, Christmas and birthdays of children. As a father, he is entitled for the same. So, by giving prior intimation to the respondent wife, the revi