IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.281 of 2010 Date of decision : August 11, 2010 Sanjiv Sharda …Petitioner. Versus Sangeeta Sharda …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Anuj Nag, Advocate. For the Respondent : Nemo. Deepak Gupta, J (Oral) After arguing the matter for some time, Mr. Anuj Nag, learned counsel for the petitioner, very fairly stated that he would be satisfied in case a direction is given to the learned trial Court, i.e. the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Shimla, to decide the application filed by the petitioner for custody of the child within a short time. 2. There is a dispute between the husband (petitioner Sanjeev Sharda) and his wife (respondent Sangeeta Sharda). The husband has filed a petition, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of conjugal rights. Alongwith the petition, he has also filed an application for custody of the child. 3. It is settled law that while deciding which parent is to be given the custody of the child, paramount importance is to be given to the welfare and well being of the child itself, but Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. …2… such an application, which is more in the nature of interim application, must be decided. I may also make it clear that while passing orders, under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for custody of the child, the Court, in such an eventuality, may not finally decide the application, at the first instance and it can start with an experiment, whereby visitation right is given to the parent who is not in custody of the child. All this is to be done keeping in view the interest of the child and the convenience of the child. 4. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial Court that it shall consider and pass appropriate orders on the application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act for custody of the child. I have been told that the case is listed before the learned trial Court on 4th September, 2010. The learned trial Court shall make an effort to get the matter reconciled between the parties, since this is a matrimonial dispute, and if such reconciliation is not possible, he shall make appropriate orders regarding the custody of the child and/or visitation rights, if any, to which the father may be entitled to, within a period of one month from 4th September, 2010. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are of general nature and will not affect the rights of the parties in the case pending in the learned trial Court. August 11, 2010(sd) ( Deepak Gupta ), J