Sunildas vs Ramya Sunildas & Ors

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for parties.

In the proceedings before the High Court dealing with the issue of maintenance, it appears that the issue of the custody of the only child of the parties came to be examined. In terms of the agreed order dated 1.3.2018, the respondent-mother was given visiting rights while the custody remaining with the father.

Thereafter the conduct of the appellant-father, which left much to be desired, has resulted in orders including the impugned orders that now the custody is with the respondent-mother with no direction having been passed about the visiting rights of the appellantfather.

The principal grievance raised before us by learned counsel for the appellant is that there was really no occasion for the custody issue to be examined by the High court as no proceedings had been filed before the family Court and the only issue to be examined was of the maintenance for which the appeal had been filed by both the parties.

On the conspectus of the matter we consider it appropriate to issue the following directions:

(i) The High Court will determine the appeals qua the issue of maintenance.

(ii) The appellant is free to initiate appropriate proceedings qua the custody of the child before the family court which will be determined on its own merits ninfluenced by any orders which may have been passed by the High Court.

(iii) In the interregnum period the custody of the child shall remain with the respondent-mother with visiting rights for the father on a pari materia basis as per the agreed order dated 1.3.2018 now instead of the respondent-mother, the appellant-father would have the visiting rights on the same terms.

The appeals are disposed of accordingly.