IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 3257 of 2010(R) ------------------------- OP.620/2006 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOHAMMED SHAFEEKH, S/O.BEERASHA, AGED 31 YEARS, ILLIKKAL ROAD, FAROKE PETTA, FAROKE.P.O, KOZHIKKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENT: --------------- HANAN.U, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.MARAKKAR KUTTY HAJI, UNNIYALUNGAL HOUSE, YARAMPADI, O.K.MURI P.O, VENGARA, OTTAKKAL ROAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(C) No.3257 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The contestants are father and mother of a child, aged about 6 years (date of birth 21.08.2004). It is unnecessary to refer to the details of the dispute. The parties are now governed by Ext.P1 judgment passed by this Court in W.P(C) No.8517 of 2008 dated 31.03.2008. The petitioner/husband filed a petition before the Family Court for modification of conditions regarding custody fixed by this Court under Ext.P1. That petition was dismissed vide Ext.P2 order, which is assailed in this Writ Petition. 2. The child now is in the custody of the mother. The father has rights for custody as stipulated in Ext.P1. The conditions oblige the mother to hand over the child to the petitioner/father on the first Friday of every month at 10 a.m and the father has to return the child at 5 p.m on the next day. The child has to remain with the mother subject to the right of the father to have custody for 3 days each during the first half of Onam and Christmas holidays and for a period of 2 weeks during summer vacation. W.P(C) No.3257 of 2010 2 3. The petitioner wanted the said conditions to be modified. The child has grown after Ext.P1 order was passed. Therefore according to the petitioner, conditions demanded a progressive modification. The application was opposed. The learned Judge of the Family Court by the impugned order dismissed the application holding that no change of circumstances have taken place. The court further took the view, it would appear, that Ext.P1 judgment having been passed by this Court, it is only this Court that can modify the said terms. 4. We have heard both the counsel. We made suggestions to the counsel and we are happy to note that the parties are in agreement now that the child can be given to the father for a longer period of time every month. They further point out that the child now attends a school and where Saturday is a working day. They hence request that the condition that the child must be handed over every Friday may be altered. 5. The counsel after taking instructions have agreed and we accordingly direct that in supersession of the condition fixed in Ext.P1 regarding monthly custody of the child with the father, the child shall now be handed over on the first and third Saturdays of all months at 5 p.m and the child shall be handed back to the mother at 5 p.m on the following Sundays. W.P(C) No.3257 of 2010 3 6. We further direct that after the child attains the age of 7 years, it shall be open to the petitioner to apply for further modification of the terms regarding monthly custody as also custody during the vacation. Appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law after hearing both sides shall then be passed by the Family Court. We make it clear that the Family Court shall be at liberty to modify the arrangements regarding custody notwithstanding the fact that Ext.P1 and this judgment are passed by this Court. 7. This Writ Petition is accordingly allowed with the above directions/observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/