AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—This Appeal is preferred against the dismissal (disposal) of O.P. No. 398 of 2008 by the Family Court holding that "the present state of affairs regarding the custody of the children will continue".
O.P. No. 398 of 2008 was filed by the appellant/wife claiming the custody of 2 children, a son and daughter, born to the contestant couple in their valid matrimony. The children were in the custody of their father. The father and mother were both employed abroad. The children, though technically in the custody of the father, were residing in hostels in connection with their education in India.
During the pendency of this appeal, it appears that, the parties have settled all their outstanding disputes. They have agreed that the son shall continue in the custody of the father while the daughter shall continue in the custody of the mother. It is submitted that the mother can be declared to be the guardian and the mother can be permitted to keep the minor daughter in her custody and take her to the Australia, where the mother is residing in connection with her employment. Joint statement dated 30.05.2010 duly signed by the contestants and counter signed by their counsel has been filed before this Court. We are informed that the conditions in the joint statement have all been complied with. The male child is in the custody of the father and the female child is in the custody of the mother.
We are satisfied that the joint statement can be accepted; this Appeal can be allowed and the impugned order can be modified.
In the result:
a) This Appeal is allowed accepting the joint statement dated 30.05.2010 filed by the parties;
b) The impugned order is set aside. The appellant Mariamma Mathew @ Jessy is declared to be the guardian of her daughter Stephy Rose Mathew (date of birth - 06.03.1997). The daughter shall remain in the custody of the mother and the mother shall be at liberty to take her to Australia;
c) All terms stipulated in the joint statement are accepted and the parties shall be governed by those terms. A copy of the joint statement shall be appended to this appellate judgment.
Hand over copies of this judgment to both the counsel today itself.
08.10.2009
Service is complete. This petition is to condone the delay of 42 days. No serious objections are raised. The delay being short - 42 days, we are satisfied that a lenient view can be taken and the delay can be condoned. Petition allowed. Delay condoned. Mat.Appeal No. 593 of 2009
Heard. Admitted. Await records.
Call on 19.10.09.
I.A. No. 2121 of 2009
The learned Counsel for the respondent prays for time to take instructions and file counter statement, if any.