IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19742 of 2009(R) -------------------------- IA 4071/08 IN GOP.1338/2008 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- MR.D.GOPINATH, 9/21, NEW SCHEME COLONY, KOVANDAMPALAYAM, COIMBATORE, PIN-641 030. BY ADV. SRI.C.VALSALAN SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN SMT.THUSHARA.V SRI.BIJU J.THADIKKAL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. M.E.MOHANDAS, AISWARYA, EDAPPALLY NORTH, KOCHI. 2. RANJITHA BHAI, W/O.M.B. MOHANDAS, AISWARYA EDAPPALLY NORTH, KOCHI. ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DYING DECLARATION TAKEN FROM DEEPA BY THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION G.O.P.NO.1338 OF 2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT JUDGE, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN OBJECTION IN O.P. NO. 1338/08 FILED BY THE RESPOMNDENTS THEREIN. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF PETITION I.A.NO0.4071/2008 ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT IN O.P.NO. 1338 OF 2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A.NO.4071/08 IN OP 1338/08 BEFORE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20-3-2009 IN IA NO. 4071/08 BY THE LEARNED FAMILY COURT JUDGE, ERNAKULAM. KS. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 19742 OF 2009 ============================ DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner is the father of a minor child aged about 4 years. The mother of the child is no more, she having committed suicide. The child is now in the custody of the maternal grand- parents. The petitioner-father filed an application to get custody of the child. In that O.P. he filed an application for interim custody. He prayed that pending disposal of the O.P., the child may be left in his custody for a period of 10 days every month. That application was opposed. The Family Court by the impugned order directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to have interim custody of the minor child from 10.30 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the fourth Saturdays of every month from the court premises. 2. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. The time granted is too short that there is hardly effective WPC.19742/2009 -2- opportunity for him to befriend the child and to enjoy the company of the child. The child also does not get effective opportunity to interact and mingle with his father. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the prayer of the petitioner may be allowed. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents opposes this application. The learned counsel for the respondents repeats the reasons which have been urged before the Family Court. We requested the learned counsel to work out a harmonious arrangement so that the father and the child will have more occasions and opportunity to interact with each other. We are happy to note that our suggestion that the child be allowed to have the company of the father from 10.a.m.to 4.30 p.m. on all Saturdays is eventually accepted by both sides. The father shall be at liberty to take the child at the Family Court at 10.a.m. But the child must be given back to the respondents at the Family Court at 4.30 p.m. During this time, the father can take the child out of the court premises but shall not certainly take the child out of the City of Kochi. We repeat that on every said Saturdays conveyance charges of Rs.500/- shall be paid by the WPC.19742/2009 -3- petitioner to the respondents. 4. We expect the Family Court to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible. But we make it clear that if the O.P. is not disposed of within a period of nine months from today, the parties may if they so choose apply for modification of the conditions and appropriate orders on merits can be passed by the Family Court. Accordingly this writ petition is allowed to the above extent. 5. Handover copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner. R. BASANT, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. WPC.19742/2009 -4-