spouses and she has not made any application for transfer of the other two cases and it is only in the interest of both the spouses that all the three litigative proceedings are conducted in the same venue at Thiruvananthapuram, as otherwise, if the proceedings are continued at in different places, it would only lead to hardships and difficulties to both parties. Having all the three litigative proceedings in one place would pave the way for better litigative management as far as both the spouses are concerned. Therefore, Sri.Basant Balaji, learned counsel appearing for the respondent (husband) is right in urging that this Court may pass necessary directions to ensure that the Guardianship Petition is continued before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. As regards the submission made by the wife that she should be given interim custody of the child at least two days in every month, it has to be borne in mind that the present application is only a Review Petition in a Transfer Petition and it is only in the fitness of things that the wife is permitted to make such a plea by filing appropriate interlocutory application before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram, which is dealing with Guardianship O.P., O.P(G&W) No.620/2016. True that it appears that there are serious differences of opinion between these spouses, but certainly the minor child should have sufficient access to the mother as it is only in the interest of the welfare of the minor child that he is exposed to the love and affection of both his parents and the quarrels and issues between the parents should not stand
