IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND (22ND) DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.2796 of 2008 Between: B.G. Sridevi … Petitioner And: B.S. Ganapathi … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.2796 of 2008 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 17.05.2008 in IA No.311 of 2008 in OP No.788 of 2007 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, wherein, the said petition filed by the respondent herein under Section 151 CPC seeking extension of time of visiting rights, was partly allowed permitting the respondent herein to take the child ‘Shrivia’ from 9 a.m. and deliver back at 8 p.m. on every Saturday and Sunday. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The petitioner herein is the wife of the respondent. During wedlock, a female child ‘Shrivia’ was born to them. The respondent filed OP No.788 of 2007 for restitution of conjugal rights and for the custody of the child. The matter was coming up for trial. The respondent filed IA No.70 of 2008 claiming visiting rights. The learned Judge, Family Court by order dated 04.03.2008 permitted the respondent to visit his daughter on every Sunday from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Subsequently, the respondent filed IA No.311 of 2008 seeking extension of visiting hours from 10 a.m. on every Saturday till 9 p.m. of Sunday. By impugned order, the learned Judge, Family Court permitted the respondent to have visiting rights from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on every Saturday and Sunday. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner-mother of the child filed the present CRP contending that Saturday is school working day for the child and if she is taken out on a working day, her studies would suffer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the respondent has never cared to visit the child even as per the original order in IA No.70 of 2008 issued on 04.03.2008 and he also did not bother to pay maintenance regularly. Learned counsel for the respondent filed memo of calculation showing payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.4000/- per month (Rs.2000/- each to the petitioner and her daughter), till February 2010 and thereafter, payment of only Rs.2000/- from March 2010 till July 2010. 5. According to the respondent, an application for modification of the earlier order of maintenance is filed and the same is pending. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.1,04,000/- is due towards arrears of maintenance, whereas the respondent says only a sum of Rs.14,000/- is due. In the circumstances, the learned Judge, Family Court shall decide as to the exact amount of arrears of maintenance due by the respondent and pass appropriate orders in that regard. 6. So far as the present grievance is concerned, as rightly contended by the petitioner, if the girl is taken out on Saturday also, which is working day for the school, it would certainly be a set back for her studies. It is not disputed that the girl is aged around 10 years and is studying in the school. Under those circumstances, with a view to ensure that the education of the girl does not suffer in any manner, it is considered that visiting rights of the respondent-father can be restricted only for Sunday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. instead of both days i.e., Saturday and Sunday. The respondent is therefore, permitted to visit the house of the petitioner and take the child at 9 a.m. and deliver her back to the petitioner at 6 p.m. on every Sunday. The other conditions imposed by the learned Judge, Family Court regarding maintenance of register in that regard, shall remain unchanged. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 7. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of as stated above. No order as to costs. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 22.02.2011 bss