Whensver child cemes to India was n0t«i1::.£:11id.c":€i {Em "
and decree: passeii by the
the said nomnclusion of me ¢1a11s',>szi£s;g: " _ " ..
REASONS
«:_fa§::t that appiication under Section 13-B of the
Atvufiafileé by mutual consent is not in éispute. It is also
_ tlispute that both the panics agreed that the chilé is
" cam and custody of the wife and shall mmain with her
' and the husband agreed that she shall have the visiting
\?/2'
rights of the minor chiid tx?l:zenever:' t1iMe"'t:u}*1_i1§<1 is
When both the parties have
regaréing the visiting fight of "izusb$ViI1€}..
whenever the child is in Imlia fwéis» bézaveen
the paxfies mutuaiiy has Ii£) {J in the decree
that is passed by {#6 V'
5. The « for the respondent
szxbmitterftiiat. the wife is that the
visiting if the petitioner to harass
the chm ifbiéjufght :p1n%di.§2 51- exercising visiting right.
” . V Ti{éréVA’i$_ no merit in this apprehension as it is clear
thafV1.;z~Ir§.é1€; betvveen the parties is as follawsc
**r2:m~fp§e:1iioners submit that the male child is in the
” and.cx'{stody of the second petitioner and shall remam
_ The saecmci petitioner amass that the first
shall have the visitation rights of the minor child
j whenever the child is in india”.
7. in View of the above clause T_ T
by consent of petitioner and resppndc-:1A::tA_i'{ ~ is clear ti41e”*
appeilant-husband can exercise fiiséféfion
child Whenever the child. he. cae§i()tVAeompe1
the child t::Q)i\~1′)ro&’1;ght to i11diea# rights
and accordingly, V }1o1ciA_’A to include
c}.ause«-9 of tliie consent in the
outer the Family court and
accoxdinéljgj, for detexmination and pass
the f011oWingfV’o:’§ier: VA
V. – A is. a§116\i}ed. The impugneé order and the
€ie_ci*r;e Ii Add]. Principal Judge, Family Court,
L Baaga;§re,.dat§;ae:;21.2.20e7 in MC.No.93’f/200613 modified
VA T ~ .. « .< inciudetlize following clause:
' * petitioners submit that the male child is in the
and custody of the second petsifioner ané shall remaizl
her. The seconé petitioner agees that the first
\9.J'3,