1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 117 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION Nos. 318 & 3699 OF 2008 Ramesh J. Shewale........ Appellant/Applicant versus Bharati Ramesh Shewale ........ Respondent. Mr. S.V. Sadavarte adv. for the Appellant/Applicant Mr. N.M. Sathaye adv. for the respondent CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 28th JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: 1. This First Appeal is directed against an order passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge No.2, Nashik dated 22-11-2007 dismissing an application moved by the present appellant/father of the child seeking custody. The appellant and the respondent were married according to Hindu rites and customs and out of the marital wedlock two children are born, and the elder one is son whereas the younger one is daughter. The son is aged about 20 years whereas the younger daughter is aged about eight years. The son is staying with the father at the residene of the father whereas the daughter is in the custody of the mother and residing with the brother at the residence of mother and brother. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant has also filed a 2 separate application claiming access to the girl child who is in the custody of the mother. In the past, an arrangement was made for the girl child to be taken by the father at the weekend and return of the child at night on Sunday. On rejecting the application for custody, interim order has ceased to operate. Hence a separate application for access to the girl child is made. The counsel for the appellant has submitted that the present application for access to the child has been filed in view of the direction issued by this court vide order dated 24-6-2008. The learned counsel for the appellant has submited that if access is granted then, the appellant would not press the appeal. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant has a right to have access to the child, he being the father. 3. Per contra the learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer for granting access on the ground that the appellant had in the past sent the child to the mother's place with the friend of the son. The submission is that the child being of eight years, she should not be left in the company of the strangers, so that any untoward incident is avoided. The said apprehension is capable of being taken care of while disposing of the present application. It is next conended by the learned counsel for the respondent that if at all the appellant wants to meet the child, the same ought to be in the presence of the respondent. To say the least it is unreasonable and unjust. I am 3 of the clear view that the appellant/applicant is entitled to have access to the child during the weekend. In the past as well the child has stayed with the father from Saturday evening till Sunday evening. Similar arrangement if made, would be in furtherence of cause of justice. In this view of the matter, I am inclined to pass the following order. 5. The appellant/applicant or his son would take the girl child personally from the residence of the respondent by about 7.00 p.m. on Saturday and reach the girl child to the residence of the respondent by 8.00 p.m. on Sunday. It is made clear that either the appellant or his son will take the girl child and reach her at the residence of the respondent and the child shall not be sent in the company of any stranger to the residence of the respondent. In the result, application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. First Appeal is also disposed of as not pressed in view of this order. In view of the disposal of first appeal and the civil application no. 3699/08, the C.A. no. 318/08 is also disposed of. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)