JUDGMENT S.C. Mohapatra, J.
1. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against order directing production of the child at Bareilly every week once.
2. Mother, who is the appellant, was given custody of the child aged about six years at present subject to condition that she will permit grand-father to visit the child every Saturday and Sunday. Grand-father filed an application before the Family Court alleging that once he went and the child was not permitted to be with him. On this, Family Court issued notice for production of the child. It also issued notice why proceedings for contempt should not be initiated against the mother, the custodian of the child. While dropping the proceedings for contempt, pursuant to the order for production of the child, the impugned order has now been passed that the child should be produced every week once at Bareilly after giving opportunity to the mother to produce the child once again.
3. This is an order in exercise of the power under the Guardian and Wards Act. Till the child attains majority the Court exercises the parental jurisdiction over the child and is to pass such orders as may be necessary for the welfare of the child. It can pass such orders either being approached by any person interested in the child or even suo motu. If this would have been kept in mind, the present order would not have been passed.
4. Mother is a teacher in a school. Child being aged six years, it can well be accepted that he is having his education, Travel of about 70 kms. every week and back to village is more injurious to the child than his welfare. This aspect has not been kept in the mind by the learned Judge possibly because this aspect was not presented to him. But in a Family Court no lawyer is permitted to appear and the Judge has onerous responsibility to look to the facts and also appreciate the social condition and other natural conditions under which he is to administer the law for upkeep of the family.
5. After hearing learned Counsel for both the parties we are satisfied that direction to produce the child each week at Bareilly is not for the welfare of the child and accordingly in modification of the order, we direct that the appellate order directing that grand-father shall be permitted to visit the child on every Saturday or Sunday shall be maintained and shall be complied with by the mother till the custody of the child is continued or further order is passed. In view of the bad blood flowing between the father-in-law and daughter-in-law, the allegation may always come in respect of non-compliance of the order. Since it is not well appreciated that a proceeding under the Guardian and Wards Act is not really a litigation between the parites, but is a proceeding for the welfare of the child, we direct that the mother shall take care that the child remains at home between 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. each Saturday and Sunday; so that father-in-law, if he visits, can have interview with the child and spend sometime so that it will have influence on the mental faculty of the child to develop for being a grown-up man in future.
6. With the aforesaid direction this appeal is disposed of. The mother, who is present in Court, submits through her learned Counsel that in future there would be no likelihood of misunderstanding.
7. A certified copy of this order, if applied for, should be issued within ten days after Dussehra holidays.