IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 14728 of 2009(R) -------------------------- OP.1100/2007 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHINE.K.K, S/O. KESAVAN, AGED 35 YEARS, KANAPPALLIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO. 26/570A, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, THEVARA.P.O, KONTHURUTHY, KOCHI-31. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- DEEPA BALAKRISHNAN, D/O. BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS, ALAMPLACKAL HOUSE, CHANGAMPUZHA ROAD, EDAPPALLY. ADV. SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) FOR R1 SMT.K.REENA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/8/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No.14728 of 2009-R ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The parties to this writ petition are an estranged couple. Their marital tie subsists; but they are residing separately. The husband has filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights. The same is resisted by the respondent/wife. The petitioner/husband in that application prayed that interim custody of the minor girl child, aged 2 years, may be handed over to him. The court below disposed of the said interlocutory application along with another interlocutory application for interim maintenance filed by the wife on behalf of the child. By the impugned order, interim maintenance was awarded to the child at the rate of Rs.1,250/- per mensem. The application for interim custody was allowed in part. The prayer for W.P.(c) No.14728 of 2009-R -: 2 :- custody was not granted; but it was directed that the petitioner/husband shall have visitorial rights between 10 a.m. and 12.30 p.m. on the 4th Saturdays of all English calendar months. 2. The petitioner/husband claims to be aggrieved by the said interim order. No appeal is maintainable against the said interlocutory order and that explains why he has come to this Court with this writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 2 ½ hours once a month is too inadequate. He prays that the child may be handed over to the petitioner for a longer period and he may be permitted to keep the child with him over night to facilitate his taking the child to his parents at their residence. 4. The prayer is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent. It is submitted that the respondent/wife apprehends harm to the child which is of a very tender age - about 2 years. The father shall not be able to manage the child if the child were given over to his custody over night. The respondent/wife has a further case that the petitioner suffers from psychic problems about which she proposes to adduce evidence in the course of the trial. She submits that the parents of the petitioner are coming to the Family Court to see the child when the petitioner W.P.(c) No.14728 of 2009-R -: 3 :- is given an opportunity to see the child on the 4th Saturdays between 10.30 a.m. and 1 p.m. At the moment, the impugned order regarding visitorial rights may not be modified, urges the learned counsel for the respondent/wife. 5. We have considered all the relevant aspects. We agree with the learned counsel for the respondent that considering the tender age of the child, it is not necessary to permit keeping away of the child from the custody of the mother during night. However, we are satisfied that, in the interests of justice, and to ensure that the child gets sufficient opportunities to be friendly with the petitioner and his parents, a longer period of time of interaction can be granted. We feel that a direction that the petitioner/husband can have access to the child at the court premises on the 2nd Saturdays of every month from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. shall advance the interests of justice. 6. Of course, if the O.P. is not disposed of by then, modification of the prayer can be made by the petitioner after six months and the Family Court shall pass appropriate orders if satisfied that the child has become friendly with the father and three will be no hazard posed by permitting the father to take the child from the court premises such that the child will be returned by 5 p.m. on that date. The Family Court shall consider W.P.(c) No.14728 of 2009-R -: 4 :- all aspects and issue appropriate directions from time to time, if necessary. 7. In the result, this writ petition is allowed in part to the above extent. The impugned order shall stand modified to the above extent only. 8. We make it clear that conveyance charges must be paid in advance by the petitioner. On the next date, Rs.700/- shall be paid so that an amount of Rs.350/- in advance will be available with the respondent/wife to produce the child on the succeeding 2nd Saturday. Thereafter Rs.350/- shall be paid at the time of each visit. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI (Judge) Nan/ //True Copy// P.S. to Judge W.P.(c) No.14728 of 2009-R -: 5 :-