Lakshmipriya M.R vs Sreehari A on 15 July, 2025

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Lakshmipriya M.R vs Sreehari A on 15 July, 2025

The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 order of the learned Family Court, Thrissur, to the extent to which it has allowed her child's interim custody to be with the respondent - father, from 10 a.m. on every Saturday, till 5 p.m. on the following Sunday; as also for the first five days of the Onam and Christmas holidays and the first 10 days for the months of April and May. The said order also orders the exchange of the child to be from the office of the Court; granting further right to the father to make video calls to him between 7.30 p.m. and 8 p.m. every day.

2. When we considered this matter on 20.06.2025, it was brought to our notice that the child is having sensitive health issues and that he needs constant hospitalization. In fact, on that day, it was reported to us that he required urgent surgery; and keeping that in mind, we passed the following order:

"Both sides are present before us. It is stated that the child is not keeping well and requires an urgent surgery.

The father requested that he be allowed to be with the child from the time of admission till his discharge. He undertakes that he will not leave the hospital in the interregnum and will bear all expenses. This is recorded.

OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 3

2025:KER:52134 It is alleged by the mother that the past treatment expenses of the child have not been met by the father. This is controverted by the learned counsel for the father and offers to produce documents on record by the next posting date in substantiation.

List for further consideration on 23.06.2025."

3. Subsequently, on 07.07.2025, the parties were before us, along with the child, and we interacted with them. We found the child to be very friendly, amiable and cherubic; and pertinently, he wanted his parents to be together, so that he can get their time without any division. We, consequently, asked the parents to talk to each other and find a solution, keeping in mind the desires of the child. We did this under the hortative hope that the parents themselves will be able to find a solution, aligning with child's sentiment and ensure him company of both their time, without being exposed to their matrimonial strife.

4. However, today, the learned counsel on both sides candidly expressed their inability to obtain a settlement between their respective clients, saying that they are still sticking to their rival positions.

5. This is rather unfortunate, but we are now enjoined to step in and make adequate provisions.

6. The fear of the petitioner - mother, as has been OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 4 2025:KER:52134 expressed by her learned counsel - Smt.Anood Jalal K.J., is that, since the child is suffering multiple health issues and since he requires constant medical attention, it would not be possible for him to be given in custody to the father as ordered by the learned Family Court, every week, or even during the holidays and summer vacation. The learned counsel explained that it is only if the child is in the best of health, can this be done; and that, therefore, it becomes very uncertain and variable, depending upon his medical requirements. She thus contended that the sharing of custody arrangement now ordered by the learned Family Court in such a situation is not tenable. She prayed that Ext.P4 be vacated; offering that her client will give access to the father over the child any time he requires, but subject to the latter's health condition.

7. Smt.Girija Gopal - appearing for the respondent, however, submitted that her client is a very devoted father, fully aware of the requirements of his child, as also his sensibilities. She affirmed that the child wants to be with his parents together and that it is her client's resolve to make this happen to its fullest possibility. She, nevertheless, explained that, since the parties are on a warpath on account of their matrimonial issues, it will not OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 5 2025:KER:52134 be possible for them to live together, or to share parenting in close proximity; but that her client will insist for the interim custody of the child only when he is healthy and well, being fully aware of his condition. She suggested that in case, on a particular day as ordered by the learned Family Court, when the child is to be in her client's custody, he is not well, an arrangement can be made by this Court that the mother inform him adequately, so that he can then take part in his treatment in the hospital. She prayed that, resultantly, Ext.P4 be not interdicted.

8. First things first!

9. The child is not a regular one and is almost a special child, requiring specific interventions medically and otherwise. When the parties are fully aware of this, we fail to understand how they could still fight over his custody in the manner as has been done before us. One would expect reasonable parents in such a scenario to talk to each other and arrive at an arrangement, where the child can have access to both the parents, without being exposed to their internecine issues; and this is exactly why we gave them such an opportunity, as recorded by us in our order dated 07.07.2025.

OP(FC).No.337 of 2025

2025:KER:52134

10. Unfortunately, as recorded above, the parties have been unable to arrive at any settlement.

11. That said, we are certain that Ext.P4 order has been issued in the best interests of the child, particularly when he has expressed his desire that he wants both the parents to be with him. The only problem in the arrangement, as made by the learned Family Court, is that the child may not be well every such day as mentioned in Ext.P4, when he is to be given in custody to the father; and this is where we will require to make sure that all rival interests are well balanced.

12. We are of the firm view that, as long as the child has no medical condition or health issues on the days when he has been ordered to be given in interim custody to the father by the learned Family Court, it shall be done by the mother; but, for any reason, his condition is to the contrary - God Forbid - the mother will inform the father on phone well in advance and give him information as to how he is being treated, particularly if he requires to be hospitalized or such other. In such event, if the child is taken care of at home, the father will be at full liberty to visit him at the mother's residence; and we record the undertaking of the latter's learned Counsel that this will be OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 7 2025:KER:52134 facilitated, without any impediment or incident. If, on the contrary, the child requires or is to be admitted in a hospital, then we allow the father to be with him and to be part of his treatment.

13. At this time, Smt.Girija K. Gopal intervened to tell us that her client has placed on record certain documents, to establish that he has been taking care of the entire medical expenses of the child. She undertook that he will continue to do so, and we record this.

14. That being so, there is one aspect in the order that troubles us, namely, that the place of exchange of the child has been shown to be in the Office of the learned Family Court. In Indu S. v. Thomas @ Manoj [2025 (3) KHC 295], this Court has already declared that such orders are untenable. We, therefore, modify the place of exchange, with the consent of both sides, to be in front of the gate of the residential house of the mother.

15. At this time, Smt.Girija K. Gopal voiced an apprehension that the respondent - mother may misuse the observations and directions herein and maintain that the child is not well, to thus defeat her client's opportunity to spend time with him. We do not think that this will be possible, since the petitioner will be in a position to visit the child at home, as we OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 8 2025:KER:52134 have above ordered. But, we deem it necessary to caution both sides that they ought to comply with our directions implicitly, without attempting to employ any tactic; and that, should they be found in deliberate violation, they would be liable to all consequences to the fullest warrant of law.

This Original Petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

M.B. SNEHALATHA, JUDGE Stu/Mms OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 9 2025:KER:52134 APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 337/2025 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1. A TRUE COPY OF IA NO. 2/2025 IN GOP 667/2025 DATED 26/04/2025 Exhibit P2. A TRUE COPY OF OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15/05/2025 IN IA 2/2025 IN GOP 667/2025 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR Exhibit P3. A TRUE COPY OF TREATMENT DETAILS OF THE MINOR CHILD AVYANDEV AGED 4 ½ YEARS Exhibit P4. A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 21/05/2025 IN IA 2/2025 IN GOP NO. 667/2025 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT FROM 01-01-2020 TO 15-04-2025 EXHIBIT R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE LISIE HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM DATED 14-10-2020 EXHIBIT R1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE LISIE HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM DATED 04-06-2021 EXHIBIT R1(d) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE LISIE HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM DATED 14-12-2021 EXHIBIT R1(e) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE LISIE HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM DATED 16-12-2021 EXHIBIT R1(f) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE ASTER MENDICITY ERNAKULAM DATED 08- 05-2023 EXHIBIT R1(g) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE ASTER MENDICITY ERNAKULAM DATED 09- 05-2023 EXHIBIT R1(h) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE ASTER MENDICITY ERNAKULAM DATED 10- 05-2023 EXHIBIT R1(i) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT'S MOTHER FROM 01-01-2020 TO 31-12-2024 EXHIBIT R1(j) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT'S FATHER FROM 01-01-2021 TO 31-12-2021 EXHIBIT R1(k) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF OP(FC).No.337 of 2025 10 2025:KER:52134 THE TREASURY SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT'S MOTHER FROM 01-01-2023 TO 31-12- 2023 EXHIBIT R1(l) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE TREASURY SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT'S FATHER FROM 01-10-2021 TO 30-09-2022 EXHIBIT R1(m) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT'S MOTHER MAINTAINED AT VARADIYAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court