Dismissed

Savitha Mukundan Menon v. Premachandran P.Nair

Kerala HC18 Jun 2012OP (FC)/1793/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of an original petition regarding temporary custody of a minor. The Court set aside a direction to modify the existing interim custody order based on the respondent's undertaking to produce the child. It outlined the consequences if the respondent fails to produce the child within 20 days.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the direction to modify the interim order dated 15.1.2010 due to the respondent's undertaking.

Savitha Mukundan Menon Vs Premachandran P.Nair — Child Custody and Guardianship | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

¶5

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/28ND JYAISHTA 1934

¶6

OP (FC).No. 1793 of 2012 (R)

¶7

I.A.NO.606 OF 2012 IN OP.NO.630/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶8

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶9

SAVITHA MUKUNDAN MENON, AGED 33 YEARS D/O.MUKUNDAN K.MENON NOW RESIDING AT 'VISHNU PRABHA', WARD XI HOUSE NO.37/1, KUNDOOR BHAGHAVATHY TEMPLE ROAD PUDURKARA, AYYANTHOLE (P.O),THRISSUR PIN: 680 003.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.N.J.JOHNSON SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶12

PREMACHANDRAN P.NAIR AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR NARAYANAMANGALAM HOUSE, PERUNTHANI VILLAGE TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. PIN: 695 008 NOW WORKING AS SYSTEM ANALYST ADCO, PB.NO.270, ABU DHABI (UAE) UNITED ARABI EMIRATES BY POWER OF ATTORNEY K.G.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR NARAYANA MANGALAM, H.NO.5C 36/778, PERUNTHANNI KARA, PETTAH VILLAGE, PETTA (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 024.

¶13

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.T.SANKARAN & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.

¶15

O.P.(FC) NO. 1793 OF 2012 R

¶16

Dated this the 18^th day of June, 2012

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

K.T.Sankaran, J.

¶19

As per the order dated 15.1.2010 in I.A.No.1742 of 2009 and I.A.No.3204 of 2009 in O.P.No.630 of 2009, the Family Court, Ernakulam directed the respondent to produce the minor Vaishnavi before the Family Court during summer, Onam and Christmas vacations and to give custody of the child to the petitioner (mother of the child), in the manner indicated in the order. The specific case of the petitioner is that in spite of the various directions issued by the Family Court, she did not get custody of the child as directed by the Court. The petitioner filed I.A.No.717 of 2012 to get interim custody of the minor child with effect from 25.3.2012 onwards, during the summer vacation. The respondent contended that the minor child is studying in Abudhabi and the summer vacation there is from June to September. The Family Court, by the order dated 2.4.2012, held that the respondent can be permitted to produce the child during

¶20

O.P.(FC) NO. 1793 OF 2012 R

¶21

:: 2 ::

¶22

the summer holidays in UAE. The Court also directed that both parties can apply for modification of the order dated 15.1.2010. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 2.4.2012.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the school vacation starts in Abudhabi from 29.6.2012 and the vacation will end on 31.8.2012. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent undertakes to produce the child before the Family Court immediately after two weeks from 29.6.2012 with prior notice to the petitioner. The respondent also undertook to comply with the order passed by the Family Court regarding interim custody of the child. The undertaking made by the respondent is recorded. In view of this undertaking, it is not necessary for the petitioner to apply for modification of the interim order dated 15.1.2010. The direction to that effect in the order dated 2.4.2012 is set aside.

¶24

The Original Petition (FC) is disposed of in the manner indicated above.

¶25

If the respondent fails to give notice to the petitioner expressing his readiness to produce the child within twenty days

¶26

O.P.(FC) NO. 1793 OF 2012 R

¶27

:: 3 ::

¶28

from 29.6.2012, the petitioner would be entitled to file a memo to that effect, in which case, the Original Petition (FC) will stand restored for further orders. It would be sufficient for the petitioner to give notice of the memo to the counsel presently appearing for the respondent.

¶29

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶30

(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge

¶31

ahz/

Savitha Mukundan Menon v. Premachandran P.Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savitha Mukundan Menon v. Premachandran P.Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sathyan and Others Vs Syamala Sathyan & Another

Vinod Anand Vs Jyothi Seetharaman

Jasmitha Vs Jeevan Kumar

Cijo John Vs Anu Francis

Beji Vs State of Kerala

Sibi John Vs State of Kerala