ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3398 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 3398 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 3398 OF 2008 Mrs.Neha Vaishal Dua ...Petitioner Vs. Mr.Hector Paul Francis ...Respondent. Ms.Seems Sarnaik for the Petitioner. Mr.Sudhir S.Hardikar for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. : R.V.MORE, J. : R.V.MORE, J. DATED DATED DATED : 24th July, 2008 : 24th July, 2008 : 24th July, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. Ms. Seema Sarnaik, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner filed a preacipe for speaking to minutes of the order dated 09/07/2008 passed in aforesaid petition on 24/07/2008. 3. The aforesaid Petition disposed of by an order dated 09/07/2008 as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file independent and separate application in the Family Court in case the child makes a complaint. Ms.Sarnaik, the learned counsel ( 2 ) appearing for the Petitioner submits that in fact she never intended to withdraw the Petition as she has no instructions. She was under impression that the petition is being dismissed on merits. She further, submits that the appropriate order on merit be passed with liberty to the Petitioner to approach the family Court in case the child makes any complaint. 4. Mr. Hardikar, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent has no objection if the order dated 09/07/2008 is revoked and the petition is disposed of on merits. In that view of the matter, the order dated 09/07/2008 is revoked. 5. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties on merits. The Petition takes exception to the order dated 05/03/2008 below Exhibit 50 in P.A. 4939/2004 passed by the Family Court No.III, Pune whereby the Petitioner is directed to hand over the minor son Brian to the Respondent at 11.00 a.m. on 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month before the Marriage Counsellor at Children’s Complex, Pune and the Respondent is directed to hand over said minor son back to the Petitioner on following Sunday at 6.00 p.m. at the gate of Petitioner’s residence. ( 3 ) 6. The sole contention of the Petitioner that overnight weekend access ought not have been granted to the Respondent as the same would be emotionally damage the child. The learned Judge of the Family Court interviewed the minor son Brian. The family court observed that the child Brian during the interview stated that he enjoys staying with his father i.e. Respondent and he further stated that the father is taking care of him. It was further observed that the minor child Brian did not make any complaint of whatsoever nature against Respondent father. I do not see any error or illegality in the approach adopted by the Family Court so as to enable me to interfere in the aforesaid order in my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Petition is devoid of any merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. Needless to mention that the Petitioner is at liberty to file a separate application in the family court in case the child Brian makes any complaint of beating against Respondent father. ( 4 ) ( R. V. MORE, J.) R. V. MORE, J.) R. V. MORE, J.)