(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the order made in I.A.No.135 of 2016 in S.M.O.P.No.83 of 2015, dated 18.7.2016, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin.)
1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the order made in I.A.No.135 of 2016 in S.M.O.P.No.83 of 2015, dated 18.07.2016, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin.
2. According to the Petitioner, the respondent/husband has filed a petition for divorce in S.M.O.P.No.83 of 2015 against the revision petitioner/husband and the same is pending. In the meantime, the revision petitioner/husband has filed I.A.No.135 of 2016 for interim custody of the Petitioner's son and the same was dismissed on 18.07.2016. The relief sought for in the said application is for interim custody of the son for one day i.e., on every Sunday, is dismissed by the Court below without considering the grievance of the Petitioner. Therefore, the order passed by the Principal District Court, Thoothukudi is erroneous. The Petitioner has come forward with the present Civil Revision Petition for the relief stated supra.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the Court below has rightly dismissed the application for the reason that the distance between Trichy and Madurai is more than 100 Kms. Therefore the relief sought for in the petition was rightly dismissed by the trial Court and prays for dismissal of the Civil Revision Petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
5. It is an admitted fact that S.M.O.P.No.83 of 2015 was filed by the respondent/wife for divorce. The present application in I.A.No.135 of 2016 has been filed by the revision petitioner/husband for interim custody of the minor child. The said application was dismissed for the reason that the distance between Trichy and Madurai is more than 100 Kms and it is not feasible for considering the relief of the Petitioner as prayed by the revision petitioner by taking into consideration the sickness of the child.
6. However, during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit before this Court that even though the relief is sought for interim custody of the minor child, it would suffice, if the petitioner is permitted to have visitation rights to visit and see the child on regular intervals.
7. In view of the above submission, the relief sought for by the Petitioner is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall have the visitation rights to see the minor child and accordingly, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:
1. The Petitioner is permitted to have visitation rights to see and visit the minor child once in a week at respondent's residence at Thoothukudi i.e., on every Sunday, between 3.00 p.m to 6.00 p.m.
2. Further the respondent/wife is directed to co-operate for the compliance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, without any deviation.
8. With the above directions, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.