IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Mat.Appeal.No. 334 of 2009()
1. VINESH MOHAN,AGED 29 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SOUMYA,AGED 23 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.M.PREM
For Respondent :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :26/10/2009
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ
==============================
MAT APPEAL NO. 334 OF 2009
============================
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009
JUDGMENT
Basant,J.
We have heard both counsel. The appellant is the father of
a minor child aged less than five years now. The child is in
custody of the mother and she is employed abroad. The father’s
application for custody was not considered favourably by the
court below. The mother stated before the court below that she,
who is employed abroad, would be in India during vacation which
shall be for a period of 10 days annually. The court below
permitted the father to take custody of the child during five days
out of those ten days.
2. The appellant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned
order. The learned counsel prays that on all the ten days the
MAT APPEAL 334/2009 2
child may be given to the custody of the father during vacation.
We find the said request is to be not reasonable as the child will
have to visit other relatives also. Altogether there is only ten
days in the vacation. In these circumstances, we are of the
opinion that the impugned direction that the father can have
custody of the child for five days does not warrant any
interference by invoking the appellate jurisdiction under Section
19 of the Family Courts Act.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that there
may be a direction to handover the child whenever the
respondent comes to India. The learned counsel for the
respondent submits that the respondent is unlikely to come to
India except during vacation. In these circumstances, we are of
the opinion that it need only be directed that if the child available
in India during other vacations or for longer periods than 20 days
the respondent shall intimate that fact to the appellant before the
respondent reaches India with the child and thereupon it shall be
MAT APPEAL 334/2009 3
open to the appellant to seek appropriate direction from the
Family Court.
4. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part to the above
extent.
R. BASANT, JUDGE
M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE
ks.