A party in contempt of court cannot be heard in proceedings until they have purged their contempt, with custody decisions prioritizing the child's welfare.

[1] This is an appeal by Legasri a/p Purana Chandran @ Maniam, the petitioner wife ("the wife") against my decision made in chambers on 3 March 2010 in respect of encl. 49.

[2] Enclosure 49 is an application by the applicant ie, Sreepathy a/l Ganapathy Krishna Iyer, the petitioner husband ("the husband"), for the following orders:

1. Variation of the decree nisi dated 13 November 2006 that:

(a) the petitioner husband, Sreepathy a/l Ganapathy Krishna Iyer (No. K/P: 680513-10-7113) shall be granted sole guardianship, custody, care and control of the child of the marriage namely, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer (Birth Certificate No: BE 63020) ("the child");

(b) the petitioner husband shall retain the international passport of the child.

(c) the petitioner husband shall cease forthwith to pay maintenance for the child to the petitioner wife.

(d) the petitioner husband shall cease forthwith to pay maintenance for the petitioner wife of RM1,000 per month.

2. That the petitioner wife, Legasri a/p Purana Chandran @ Maniam (p) (No. K/P: 740228-08-5172) produce the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer, and hand the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer to the petitioner husband, forthwith upon service of this order, to be brought by the petitioner husband back into Malaysia.

3. That any person, who is in a position, to produce the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer, and hand the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer to the petitioner husband, forthwith upon service of this order, to be brought by the petitioner husband back into Malaysia.

4. That the petitioner husband be authorised to remove the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer from the petitioner wife's control.

5. That any person who has information as to the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer's whereabouts shall disclose that information to the petitioner husband.

6. Alternatively, that any police officer or any other authorised person which authorised person shall include an officer of the Malaysian Embassy, be authorised to enter into the residence of the petitioner wife and/or to enter into any other place where the petitioner wife is situated, and search for the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer, using reasonable force if necessary.

7. That any police officer or any other authorised person which authorised person shall include an officer of the Malaysian embassy, be authorised to do the following:

a. To assist the petitioner husband, to obtain custody and control of the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer from any place wherein the child Adrika Sreepathy Iyer may be found.

b. That the said police officer in executing the order be further authorised to search for the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer in the place to which admittance has been obtained.

8. That the petitioner wife either by herself, and/or her agents and/or her servants be restrained from taking the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer, out of Malaysia.

9. That the petitioner wife have access to the child, Adrika Sreepathy Iyer, under the supervision of the petitioner husband at his residence on sunday, from 2pm to 4pm.

10. That notice of this order be given to the Jabatan Imigresen Malaysia by being provided with a certified true copy of this order.

11. That the said child's international passport be handed over to the petitioner husband forthwith upon service of this order;

12. That costs of this application be paid by the petitioner wife in any event.

[3] The grounds of this application are:

a. The petitioner wife has without the knowledge and/or consent of the petitioner husband surreptitiously removed the child of the marriage out of this jurisdiction and remains out of this jurisdiction till to date;

b. The petitioner w