RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
The dispute involved in this case is with regard to the custody of minor child aged 3½ years. The father of the child by name Ashly had filed O.P.(G&W) 822/2011 before the Family Court, Kottayam which was finalized as per judgment dated, 23rd May, 2013 with the following directions:
“In the result: above O.P. is allowed as follows:
(a) The petitioner is appointed as the guardian of the minor child Ashly.
(b) The child Ashly will be given permanent custody of the petitioner from 01.05.2014 onwards.
(c) Till then for the first three months the petitioner and his elder child Adithyan can visit minor Ashly at the house of the respondents on every Sunday from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
(d) After three months, apart from visiting the child every Sunday, the petitioner can take the child to his house once in a month preferably on 2nd Saturdays and the following Sunday.
(e) The petitioner can take permanent custody of the child on 01.05.2014 and meantime above arrangements are to be followed to make the child acquainted with the petitioner and his elder child, so that, handing over of W.P.(C)No.13463 OF 2014 : 2 :
the child can be done smoothly and cordially in a pain free manner.
(f) After giving permanent custody of the child to the petitioner, the respondents can take the child to their house on every 2nd Saturday and the following Sunday, and they can also visit the child at the house of the petitioner on any other day.
(g) During Onam, Christmas and summer vacations the respondents can take custody of the child during first half of the vacation.
(h) No order as to costs.”
2. The petitioner is the grandfather of the child and his case is that the second respondent herein, who was the petitioner before the Family Court, has not complied with the conditions imposed by the Family Court to have the permanent custody of the child. Instead, the second respondent has made a complaint before the first respondent to get custody of the child and the petitioner is being called to the police station and threatened. Hence the petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction to the first respondent not to harass the petitioner at the instance of the second respondent.
3. Learned Government Pleader submits that, at no point of time, had there been any incident causing harassment to the petitioner. Pursuant to the complaint filed by the second respondent, the matter W.P.(C)No.13463 OF 2014 : 3 :
was enquired into by the police and the second respondent was let known that he could pursue the matter before the Family Court.
In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, with liberty to the parties to approach the Family Court for appropriate reliefs.
MANJULA CHELLUR, Chief Justice jes P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge