:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3466 OF 2007 Milind Shripati Gaikwad ...Petitioner Versus Kumari Amruta Milind Gaikwad and anr. ....Respondents Nitin Mulye Adv. for the petitioners. B.H.Vyas Adv. for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 7th January, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. The petitioner father before me although satisfied with the ad-hoc arrangement made in the impugned order permitting him to see the child at Mumbai at Sanjay Gandhi National Park, is aggrieved by the fact that he :2: :2: :2: does not have a chance of seeing the child for a longer period and that too in the vacations of the school. His anxiety is that as a father he wants to meet the child during his vacations at Akluj, District Solhapur where the child is brought to his maternal grandparents. 2. I see no reason to grant any such prayer, simply because the main matter is pending. If the petitioner seeks any such relief with regard to meeting the child during vacations at Akluj, his remedy would be to apply to the court where his proceedings are pending. Needless to state that the courts must after hearing the parties, make such ad-hoc /interim arrangements or modify the earlier directions depending upon the facts and circumstances placed before it. Since the petitioner has liberty to move the Trial Court where the proceedings are pending, there is no reason to pass any orders on this Writ Petition and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ********