SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Devi Balakrishnan vs Devi Balakrishnan on 13 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

THURSDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Mat.Appeal.No. 1083 of 2018

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN GOP 631/2015 of FAMILY COURT,
IRINJALAKUDA DATED 27-02-2017

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

DEVI BALAKRISHNAN,
AGED 34 YEARS
D/O THAIPARAMBATH VEETTIL BALAKRISHNAN, THAIPARAMBATH
HOUSE, LOKAMALESWARAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT – 680664.

BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RENJITH
SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (NELLAD)

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
SREEKUMAR,
AGED 37 YEARS
VALIYA PARAMBIL NEELAMBARAN, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KOTTIKKAL DESOM, AZHIKODE VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK,
THRISSUR – 680664.

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.12.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C.K. ABDUL REHIM

T.V. ANILKUMAR, JJ.
—————————————————–
Mat. Appeal No. 1083 OF 2018
——————————————————-
Dated this the 13th day of December, 2018

JUDGMENT

Abdul Rahim, J.

Challenge in this appeal filed under Section 19 of the

Family Courts Act, 1984 is against the judgment of the Family

Court, Irinjalakuda in G.O.P. No.631/2015. The respondent

herein had approached the Family Court, Irinjalakuda seeking

permanent custody of the minor child of the parties, namely

Rishi.V.S. The Family Court had disposed of the original

petition through the judgment impugned herein, by declaring the

respondent as the natural guardian of the minor child. The

parents of the respondent were allowed to interact with the child

before the court on every last working Saturdays for one hour

from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. The respondent was allowed to have

company of the child whenever he is available in the native
Mat. Appeal No. 1083 of 2018
-:3:-

place, once in a month from the morning to the evening, under

the special supervision of the court. He was allowed to take the

child on such occasions from 10 a.m. till 4 p.m. Further, he was

permitted to have custody of the child for a period of two days

during Onam, Christmas and Vishu holidays, during day time,

and on every alternative days for one week during any half of

the mid-summer vacation, including night custody on getting

prior permission from the court.

2. The judgment of the Family Court is assailed mainly

on the ground that the respondent who was abroad was missing

and he has absconded willfully. The news was published in all

Dailies in Kerala and it revealed that the respondent is not in a

stable mental status. Hence it is contended that any further

custody of the child to such a person will not be safe. It is

contended that, if over night custody is given to the respondent,

there is every chance that he may abscond along with the child.

3. We notice that the ground for assailing the judgment
Mat. Appeal No. 1083 of 2018
-:4:-

of the Family Court is mainly based on a subsequent

development and a change of circumstance. Learned counsel

for the appellant pointed out that, the observations contained in

the impugned judgment to the effect that the arrangements

made therein shall continue till the child attains the age of eight

years, may preclude the appellant from approaching the Family

Court again. Therefore he is assailing those findings also.

4. We are of the considered opinion that it remains trite

through various decisions of the apex court that there is no

finality with respect to orders passed under the Guardians and

Wards Act pertaining to custody of minor children. Whenever

there is any substantial change of circumstance, it will be left

open to the parties to approach the appropriate court seeking

modifications regarding the arrangements with respect to

custody of minor children. Therefore, we are of the opinion that

the appellant can be given liberty to approach the Family Court

seeking modifications of the arrangements contained in the
Mat. Appeal No. 1083 of 2018
-:5:-

order impugned herein. Needless to observe that, such

application if any filed need to be considered by the Family

Court on its own merit, after affording opportunity to the other

side.

5. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the

above appeal is hereby dismissed by reserving liberty to the

appellant to approach the Family Court afresh, seeking

modification of the judgment impugned, based on the change of

circumstances, alleged in this appeal. It is clarified that such

application if any filed shall be disposed of by the Family Court,

independently based on its merits.

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

Sd/- T.V. ANILKUMAR, JUDGE, JUDGE.

ul/-

[True copy]
P.S. to Judge.

Mat. Appeal No. 1083 of 2018
-:6:-

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PUBLISHED IN
MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 18.5.2018

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PUBLISHED IN
MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 21.5.2018

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation