Mother tries to force her EX husband to surrender kid’s passport. Court declines her wishes. Says as long as father does NOT disturb mother’s visiting rights he is free to take kid abroad.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP (FC).No. 106 of 2011(R)
1. V.P.KAVITHA RANJINI @ URVASHI, AGED … Petitioner
1. MANOJ KADOM POOTHRA MADOM JAYAN @ … Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon’ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon’ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
O R D E R
K. M. JOSEPH &
M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ.,
O.P.(F.C.) No.106 of 2011 R
Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011
K.M. Joseph J.,
- The prayers in the O.P.(F.C.) are as follows: “(i) To call for the records leading upto Ext.P2 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. (ii) To direct respondent to surrender the passport of the child Thejalakshmy @ Kunjatta before the Family Court, Ernakulam.”
- Though we have not admitted, it was being considered along with the O.P.(F.C.) No.112 of 2011 relates to the same parties.
- The matter arises out of G.O.P. No.964 of 2009 filed by the petitioner. The petitioner moved I.A. No. 3766 of 2010 seeking O.P.(F.C.) No.106 of 2011 direction to surrender the passport of her daughter, which is in the possession of the respondent before the Family Court. It is the case of the petitioner that following the marriage of the respondent, the child may be taken abroad by the respondent with his future wife in whose company the child will be extremely uncomfortable. Ext.P1 I.A. was rejected by Ext.P2 order. We have perused the order. The Family Court has directed the respondent to file an affidavit to the effect that he shall make available the child as and when directed. Thereafter the apprehension alleged by the appellant was unfounded. The application was dismissed.http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
- When the matter was pending before this Court, apart from the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, the respondent has also filed an additional counter affidavit, which inter-alia reads as follows “(i) That on any occasion that I may take my child abroad along with me using her passport now in my possession, I will do so only after informing the Hon’ble Family Court, Ernakulam in the form of an affidavit about the details of my trip along with my child itinerary of such O.P.(F.C.) No.106 of 2011 trip including the places of destination and duration of such visits etc. (ii)That on any occasion that I may take my child abroad along with me, I will do so only without disturbing or disrupting the visitorial rights granted to the petitioner mother vide common order dt.13.11.2009 on I.A. No. 1565 of 2009 in O.P. No.623 of 2008 and I.A. No.2824 of 2009 in G.O.P.No. 964 of 2009, the Hon’ble Family Court vide the said common order dt.13.11.2009.”
- We think that the apprehension of the petitioner would satisfy in the interest of justice. We close the O.P.(F.C) recording the stand of the respondent in the portion of the additional affidavit filed before this Court, which we have extracted above.
M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE)
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting