THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.R.P. No. 2768 of 2009 O r d e r: This C.R.P. is directed against the order dated 15.05.2009, passed by the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 1130 of 2008 in O.P. No. 675 of 2008, filed by the petitioner, praying to grant interim custody of respondent No.2 during weekends from 9.00 A.M. of Saturday to 6.00 P.M. on the following Sunday. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. Inasmuch as the petitioner-husband filed the main O.P. seeking divorce from respondent No.1-wife, and also sought custody of respondent No.2-son, the Family Court felt that unless and until the question as to whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of divorce from respondent No.1-wife is considered, based on the evidence to be adduced at the trial, no relief of interim custody of respondent No.2- son, can be granted. Be that as it may, considering the nature of dispute between the parties, this Court directed the parties to appear before the Court, and as directed they appeared before the Court on 06.08.2009, and on that day respondent No.1 agreed to bring respondent No.2-son on 07.08.2009. On 07.08.2009, the parties appeared, but they refused to reconcile. However, considering the submission made that the birthday is going to fall on 11.08.2009, this Court passed the following order: Heard the learned counsel for both the parties as also the parties-in-person. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that 11.08.2009 is the birthday of the 2nd respondent herein and the petitioner wants to celebrate the same. In the circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to organize the birthday party of the 2nd respondent in the place selected by the 1st respondent on 11.08.2009. The representatives of the counsel of both the parties may be present at the time of the birthday party and if there is any untoward incident taken place, they shall report back the same to this Court by way of filing an affidavit. List the matter after two weeks. As ordered above, the parties celebrated the birthday of respondent No.2 on 11.08.2009. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.1-wife did not co-operate and did not allow the petitioner to interact with the petitioner and only allowed respondent No.2 to move with his brother, who is presently in the custody of the petitioner. The learned counsel for respondent No.1-wife submitted that respondent No.1-wife is not willing to give custody of respondent No.2-son because the petitioner has ill-treated her. Having regard to the non-compromising stand taken by both the parties, and considering the tender age of respondent No.2-son who is aged only five years, I am not inclined to interfere with the order under revision, refusing to grant interim custody of respondent No.2-son to the petitioner, and more so when respondent No.1-wife is not willing to give the custody. However, considering the nature of disputes between the parties, the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, is directed to dispose of the main O.P. itself expeditiously. Accordingly, the C.R.P. is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: October, 2009 KSR