BY AD vs THOMSTINE K.AUGUSTINE

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 MAT.APPEAL NO. 277 OF 2025 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.04.2024 IN OP NO.1357 OF 2017 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ANNU JACOB, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O. A JACOB THOMAS, THEKKETHATTIL HOUSE, OPPOSITE RAILWAY STATION, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001 BY ADVS. THOMSTINE K.AUGUSTINE GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) RESPONDENT: THARUN KOSHY, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. P. KOSHY, KAIPPANATTU PUTHENPURAYIL, PUTHUPPALLY P.O., PUTHUPPALLY KARA, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 68601 BY ADV.PHILIP T.VARGHESE THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

07.04.2025, ALONG WITH MAT.APPEAL NO.105/2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 3 JUDGMENT [Mat.Appeal Nos.105/2025, 277/2025] Devan Ramachandran, J. We are considering these two Appeals together, because the orders impugned relate to the custody of child for two spells. Further, the parties are also in substantial consent, as we will state presently.

2. Mat.Appeal No.105/2025 has been filed by the father of the child involved, assailing the order of the learned Family Court, Kottayam, granting his permanent custody to his mother; while, Mat.Appeal No.277/2025 has been filed by the mother challenging the interim custody given to the father during Onam and Christmas holidays, as also the Summer vacation.

3. Needless to say, the parties are in dispute regarding the custody arrangement of the child; but we wanted to verify whether there could be a reunion possible between them and therefore, referred them to psychological counselling this morning, under the aegis of the Family Counselling Centre of this Court. Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 4 However, the report of the Counselor indicates that a reunion of the parties may not be possible; but this is an issue we may have to eventually deal with in a different matter, namely Mat.Appeal No.100/2025, which is also pending.

4. As far as these Appeals are concerned, as we have said above, they relate only to the custody of the child.

5. Before we move forward, we must record that the parties were before us today, along with the child; and we had a detailed interaction with them in the chambers. Interestingly, there was not much of a dispute between the parents as to the custody of the child, with both of them saying that they will act as per his wishes.

6. We, thereupon, interacted with the child and he came across as being a very articulate boy, but with tremendous emotional turmoil, manifest from the fact that tears were rolling down his cheeks as he spoke. He exhibited severe tension and stress; and on our persuasion, he disclosed us that this was Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 5 because he is caught between his parents, whom he loves equally and dearly. He also told us that he does not mind his parents living separately, but that he loathes being dragged into courts and pulled apart for custody. He narrated to us his desires, including that he wants to be a loco-pilot; that he wants to watch IPL; wants to go on a cruise; and further other activities he wants during this vacation. No doubt, he is a very matured boy, who told us that he will decide the manner in which he wants to spend time with his parents, at least during the holidays/vacations; further adding that, during his school working days, he would spend the Saturday nights with his father, which he would inform him as and when he is ready. In fact, the child told us that he wants to go with his father this evening to Chennai, since he wants him to take him to an IPL match, as also for a cruise.

7. As we have said above, the parents – perhaps being overwhelmed by the response of their child – conceded that they will abide by any direction to be issued by this Court, based on Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 6 his desires.

8. We notice that, in the impugned orders, the learned Family Court has granted permanent custody of the child to the mother without any visitation being reserved to the father on the school working days; but has then granted him interim custody during the entire period of Onam, Christmas and Summer holidays/vacations.

9. The mother – who is the appellant in Mat.Appeal No.277/2025, requests that the holiday/vacation time of the child be ordered to be shared equally by the parents; while, the father – who is the appellant in Mat.Appeal No.105/2025, prays that, even though the permanent custody may be with the mother, he be given enough time with his son during the weekends.

10. We, therefore, put it to the parties to reflect upon the wishes of their child, as disclosed by him to us in their presence; and they agreed that they will allow the time of the child to be shared between them equally, as he desires. They, however, Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 7 prayed that, as a benchmark and so as to provide a guidance, this Court fix the manner of sharing of such custody; and then suggested that, during the school working days, the child can be taken by the father in the morning of Saturdays and returned to the mother in the evening of the ensuing Sunday, but again subject to the desire of the child. As regards holidays/vacations, both of them agreed that they will allow the child to have the last word, but that, they be allowed to share his custody equally. In the afore circumstances and with the express consent of both sides, we allow these Appeals and modify the impugned orders in the following manner: a) The permanent custody of the child will continue with the mother; but the father will be entitled to his interim custody from 10 A.M. every Saturday, till 5 P.M. the ensuing Sunday. If, for any reason, either of these days to be a working/academic/extra-curricular activities day, the father will ensure that the child attends school without fail. Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 8 b) The father and the mother will be entitled to equally share the Onam, Christmas and Summer holidays/vacations of the child – all as per his school calendar; and for this purpose, we order that the first five days of both Onam and Christmas vacations are entitled to the father to have his interim custody; while, the balance with the mother. As regards the Summer Vacation, the father will be entitled to have the first fifteen days of April and May each, with the rest of the time being granted to the mother. c) The place of exchange of the child for all the afore arrangements shall be in front of the residential gate of the mother, which both sides have agreed upon. d) We finally order that, during the holidays or any other day, when one of the parents is in charge of the child in terms of the afore directions or otherwise, the other will be entitled to talk to him on video/voice call, on their respective numbers – which they admitted before us are available with them; and that the Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 9 parent exercising custody will facilitate it without any impediment. Needless to say, even though we have fixed the sharing of the time as afore, we request the parents to go by what their child wants; and if he should request for a modification, by increasing the time in favour of one of them for reasons that he may have, they accede to the same without creating further turmoil. We close, saying that this is a classic example where we saw a child being traumatized by the custody battle of his parents; and hope that they find peace understanding that his wishes and intent are far more important than their personal scores. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/- M.B. SNEHALATHA JUDGE RR Mat Appeal 105/25 & 277/25 10 APPENDIX OF MAT.APPEAL 277/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13/5/2022 IN OP(FC) NO. 252/2022 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT