IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH C.R.P. No.2374 of 2014 Between:
Ashok Kumar Mahapatro And Krishna Chandra Panda and another … Petitioner … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH C.R.P. No.2374 of 2014 ORDER:
This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 27.06.2014 passed in I.A. No.508 of 2012 in O.P. No.1261 of 2012 by the Judge, Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam.
The 1st respondent herein filed I.A. No.508 of 2012 in O.P. No.1261 of 2012 under Section 12 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 claiming custody of his minor children namely Master Ranjan Satyavadhi Panda and Prabanti Panda.
The case of the 1st respondent in the said application is that he married the daughter of revision petitioner namely Swathilatha Panda on 20.06.2004 and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with two aforesaid minor children. On 28.06.2012, Swathi Latha Panda committed suicide and registered a criminal case against the 1st respondent herein. It is his further case that the revision petitioner and his family members came to the house of the 1st respondent at Visakhaptnam and forcibly removed the children from their custody and went back to their house in Parvathipuram. Thereupon, the mother of the 1st respondent lodged a complaint against the revision petitioner and four others. The 1st respondent herein is working in Micro Tech Electronic, authorized LG Servicing Centre at Vizianagaram as a Service Engineer and earning salary of Rs.35,000/- per month. His mother Mayavathi Panda, Younger brother Jagannadha Panda and one sister Vasantha Kumari Panda all are residing under one roof and they will give support to him to take care and custody of the minor children.
His brother Jagannadha Panda is working as a faculty in Narayana Group of Schools, and earning Rs.18,000/- per month.
The 1st respondent herein came to know that his children are suffering with starvation due to lack of food and the revision petitioner not taking proper care and custody of the minor children. The revision petitioner married the 2nd respondent after death of his first wife. Further, he also came to know that the revision petitioner trying to give the minor children on adoption. Hence, he filed the said interlocutory application seeking custody of his minor children from the revision petitioner.
While denying the averments made by the 1st respondent herein in the said I.A., the revision petitioner filed counter affidavit, inter alia, stating that his daughter, wife of the 1st respondent herein, committed suicide because of harassment by the 1st respondent.
After perusal of the entire case on record, the Court below allowed the said I.A. holding that in the better interest of the children and the 1st respondent herein being the natural guardian, who is competent person to look after the welfare of the children, directed the revision petitioner to handover the temporary custody of minor children within 15 days, from the date of the order, pending disposal of the main O.P. Assailing the same, the revision petitioner, filed the present revision petition.
This Court on 08.08.2014, while ordering notice before admission, granted interim suspension of the impugned order and the 1st respondent herein is permitted to visit the children once in a week with prior intimation to guardian Anoop Kumar Mahapatro at Jamshedpur.
When the learned counsel for the 1st respondent herein submitted that children may be brought to him to see them, the Court expressed its view that it is for the 1st respondent to go and see the children wherever they are but the children cannot be brought to him, which may cause inconvenience to the minor children.
Eventually, both the learned counsel submitted that without expressing any opinion on the merits of the impugned order, the Court below may be directed to dispose of the main O.P. within some reasonable time and that can resolve all the problems once for all.
In that view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, this revision petition is disposed of directing the Court below to dispose of the main O.P. No.1261 of 2012, within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to observe that both the parties shall also cooperate with the Court below for disposal of the case within the time stipulated by this Court. However, till such time, the interim order granted by this Court on 08.08.2014 shall continue as agreed by both the learned counsel.
Accordingly, this revision petition is disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 07.11.2014 LSK