Civil Revision No. 379 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 379 of 2008 Date of decision : 21.5.2010 Dr. Manu Jatana ....Petitioner Versus Dr. Ramandeep Rattan ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Amar Vivek, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tribhuwan Dahiya, Advocate for the respondent S. D. ANAND, J. There already is an order listing the time schedule at which respondent-mother visit the child of the parties who is presently based overseas and who comes to India from time to time. The grievance of the petitioner is qua the order it directs the petitioner-father to drop child at the house of the respondent-mother. This Court need not go into the validity or otherwise of the grievance because both the learned counsel agree that the venue of the meeting may be changed. On consensual basis, it is ordered that the respondent-mother shall be entitled to meet the child from 3.00 P.M. to 5.00 P.M. on all the alternative working days of the month when she visits India. She would announce her presence in India to the petitioner-father by appropriate means and it will be for the latter to drop the child at the Court of Sessions, Panchkula on the indicate dates. The parties shall report to the learned District Judge, Panchkula who shall lodge them at comfortable place within Civil Revision No. 379 of 2008 2 the Court premises and ensure that meeting materialises without any interruption. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-father states that even the petitioner agrees that he would not be present for duration of the meeting. However, it is made clear that grant of this consensual order is without prejudice to whatever rights the parties may claim for the permanent custody of the child. The petition under the Guardianship Act for the custody of the child is pending consideration at the hands of the learned Guardian Judge, Panchkula. Learned counsel for the parties state that they would be content and interest of justice would be served, if the learned Guardian Judge is directed to dispose of the custody case within a time-bound frame. The matter is presently listed for 13.08.2010. On consensual basis, the matter is directed to be pre-poned to 11.06.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would avail of two opportunities to conclude his evidence. Equal number of opportunities shall be availed of by the respondent to conclude her evidence. Each adjournment shall be of a duration not more than a period of fortnight. The learned Trial Court shall dispose of the petition on merits thereof by or on 30.10.2010. Disposed of accordingly. May 21, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE