High Court of KeralaDivision BenchDisposition directed: urgent disposal by Family...

Soumya V.S. v. Sandeep, Vijayan and Sarasamani

Case / Petition Number:OP (FC) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • A. Muhammed Mustaque, J.
  • Sophy Thomas, J.
Judgment Date
2022-06-01
Court Decision / Holding
The High Court directed expedited disposal by the Family Court of GOP 178/2020 within five weeks. Interim arrangements: during the mother’s presence in India, the minor shall reside with her, with daily contact with the father via Whatsapp video calls (7:30–9:00 pm); if the mother leaves India, the child shall be with the father, with contact rights to the mother; the father may have custody/visitation on Saturdays (2:00–4:00 pm) at the Family Court, Irinjalakkuda; all other connected cases to be de-linked; the final determination of custody will be by the Family Court after evidence is adduced.
Final Disposition
Disposition directed: urgent disposal by Family Court within five weeks; interim custody arrangement as described; de-linking of related cases; merits-based decision to follow.”}

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Soumya V.S.

Respondents

  • Sandeep
  • Vijayan
  • Sarasamani

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Achuthan K.
  • • Kusumam K.
  • • Kalesh R.
  • • Rejitha P.
  • • Mary Reeja R.
  • • R. Nair
  • • P. N. Anoop
  • • P. S. Nandanan
  • • Santhosh Peter (Mamalyil)
  • • Chithra Prabha
  • • M. S. Sandeep Sudhakaran
  • • K. C. Salman
  • • P. Smitha

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a humanitarian custody matter in the High Court of Kerala (Ernakulam) arising from three OP (FC) cases where a mother Soumya V.S. sought permission to take her child abroad; the Family Court in Irinjalakuda had declined the application. The mother, presently in India, had earlier been in Dubai and had moved the Family Court to permit international travel for the child. The urgency stems from the child’s education and welfare, with competing pressures between the mother’s desire to reside with the child and the father’s asserted guardianship. The High Court references Smith Antony v. Koshy Kurian to underscore that the Family Court is the proper forum for questions of guardianship and custody and that it may not be proper, in an interlocutory setting or under Article 227, to permit one parent to take the child abroad. However, recognizing the need for an expedited resolution, the Court directs that the Family Court dispose of GOP 178/2020 within five weeks and lays down interim custody arrangements. While the mother remains in India, the child shall reside with her, with daily father–child contact via Whatsapp video calls from 7:30 pm to 9:00 pm. If the mother leaves India, the child must reside with the father, with paternal access on Saturdays (2:00–4:00 pm) at the Family Court, Irinjalakkuda; other connected cases are to be de-linked. The Court emphasizes that the ultimate welfare determination will be made by the Family Court after evidence is adduced.

Provisions of Law Cited

Article 227 of the Constitution of IndiaFamily Courts Act, 1984 - Section 7(1) explanation (g)Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 - Section 9

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes.
  • Family Court is the competent forum for guardianship, custody, and access questions; supervisory powers of the High Court under Article 227 cannot bypass the Family Court.
  • Devilal Bhagat v. Rekha Bhagat (2008 (3) KLT S.N 14 (C.No.16)) – confirms Family Court jurisdiction in matters of guardianship and custody within its territorial jurisdiction.
  • Smith Antony v. Koshy Kurian (2002 (3) KLT 516) – cautions against permitting unilateral travel abroad in interlocutory proceedings and underscores the primacy of Family Court in custody matters and the limits of supervisory courts.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner-mother contends that custody and travel abroad for the child are necessary considerations in the welfare of the child, seeking urgent disposal and relying on the Family Court’s jurisdiction to decide guardianship/custody. She emphasizes continuity of education and welfare, and proposes a scheme of custody and contact rights during the period the child remains with her in India, including daily video contact with the father and weekend visitation. She asserts that the Family Court should decide the matter on an expedited basis, given the pendency since GOP 178/2020 and related filings.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents oppose travel abroad and stress that the child’s welfare would be best safeguarded by keeping custody within the jurisdiction of Indian courts. They contend that the Family Court is the proper forum for guardianship and custody matters and caution against non-enforceable foreign travel orders. They advocate continued custody in accordance with existing orders and emphasize the need for a thorough merits-based decision by the Family Court after taking evidence. They also support maintaining the status quo with appropriate contact arrangements to ensure the child’s welfare and relationship with both parents.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Smitha Antony v. Koshy Kurian2002 (3) KLT 516PositiveUsed to emphasize that in interlocutory proceedings or under Article 227 the court may not properly permit a parent to take the child abroad; supports keeping the matter within the Family Court jurisdiction.
Devilal Bhagat v. Rekha Bhagat2008 (3) KLT S.N 14 (C.No.16)PositiveCited to reinforce that suits and proceedings involving guardianship/custody are cognizable only by the Family Court when within its territorial jurisdiction.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Soumya V.S. v. Sandeep, Vijayan and Sarasamani and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS** **WEDNESDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944** **OP (FC) NO. 272 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2022 IN I.A.NO.28/2022 IN GOP** **178/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA** ## **PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ORIGINAL RESPONDENT:** **SOUMYA V.S., AGED 34 YEARS, D/O VENNARAPARAMBIL SURESHBABU, RESIDING AT ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE AND TALUK, PIN - 680667** **BY ADVS. ACHUTHAN K. K.KUSUMAM K.KALESH R.S.REJITHA P.T.MARY REEJA R. NAIR** ## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/ORIGINAL PETITIONERS:** **1 SANDEEP, S/O VIJAYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, 3RD OFFICER IN SHIP, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O. KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **2 VIJAYAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O RAMAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **3 SARASAMANI, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O VIJAYAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 2 **BY ADVS. P.N.ANOOP P.S.NANDANAN SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL) CHITHRA PRABHA M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN** **THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2022, ALONG WITH OP(FC).NOS.280/2022 AND 282/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 3 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944 OP (FC) NO. 280 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2022 IN I.A.NO.25/2022 IN GOP** **178/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA** ## **PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/ORIGINAL RESPONDENT:** **SOUMYA V.S., AGED 34 YEARS, D/O VENNARAPARAMBIL SURESHBABU, RESIDING AT ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE AND TALUK, PIN - 680667** **BY ADVS. ACHUTHAN K. K.KUSUMAM K.KALESH P.T.MARY REEJA R. NAIR R.S.REJITHA** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/ORIGINAL PETITIONERS:** - **1 SANDEEP, S/O VIJAYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, 3RD OFFICER IN SHIP, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O. KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **2 VIJAYAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O RAMAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** 4 ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 **3 SARASAMANI, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O VIJAYAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **BY ADVS. P.N.ANOOP P.S.NANDANAN(N-25) SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL)(K/1405/2003) K.C.SALMAN(K/001390/2003) P.SMITHA(K/751/2008) M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN(K/000598/2018)** **THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2022, ALONG WITH OP (FC).NOS.272/2022 AND 282/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 5 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944 OP (FC) NO. 282 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2022 IN I.A.NO.27/2022 IN GOP** **178/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA** ## **PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/ORIGINAL RESPONDENT:** **SOUMYA V.S., AGED 34 YEARS, D/O VENNARAPARAMBIL SURESHBABU, RESIDING AT ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE AND TALUK, PIN - 680667** **BY ADVS. ACHUTHAN K. K.KUSUMAM K.KALESH R.S.REJITHA P.T.MARY REEJA R. NAIR** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/ORIGINAL PETITIONERS:** - **1 SANDEEP, S/O VIJAYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, 3RD OFFICER IN SHIP, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O. KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **2 VIJAYAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O RAMAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 6 **3 SARASAMANI, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O VIJAYAN, KUMARANILAYAM, ANAPPUZHA DESOM AND P.O, KODUNGALLUR VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, PIN - 680667** **BY ADVS. P.N.ANOOP P.S.NANDANAN(N-25) SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL)(K/1405/2003) K.C.SALMAN(K/001390/2003) SMITHA PILLAI(K/1513/2003) M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN(K/000598/2018)** **THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2022, ALONG WITH OP(FC).NOS.272/2022 AND 280/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 7 ## **J U D G M E N T** ## A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. This matter arises from different interlocutory applications filed in a pending application for permanent custody filed by the father. The mother, who is now stated to be in Dubai, moved an application before the Family Court to take the child abroad. That application has been declined. The mother is now here in India. She is personally present before us. The father of the child is also present. Detailed orders have been passed by the Family Court in different interlocutory applications. Urgency looms in this case for the reason that the child's future is hanging in the decision to be taken regarding his custody. If the mother is permitted to take the child abroad, he can continue his education in Dubai. If it is not allowed, he has to be in the company of the father. The welfare of the child is a question to be decided finally, after allowing the parties to adduce evidence. O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 8 2. In **Smitha Antony** _vs._ **Koshy Kurian** (2002 (3) KLT 516), we have considered a similar issue and opined that in an Interlocutory Application or in exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, it may not be proper for the court to permit one of the spouse to take the child abroad. It is appropriate to refer the relevant paragraphs in the said judgment: “8. We sought the assistance of Amicus Curiae Advocate Sri.Anil Malhotra who is an expert in the field of child custody matters, to get more insight into this issue. Learned Amicus Curiae appeared before this Court online and submitted that, jurisdictional Family Court is the proper forum to decide on the question of guardianship of the person or the custody of or access to any minor. The High Court exercising supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot bye pass the Family Court to decide on the question of guardianship of the person or custody of or access to any minor. Before deciding the question of guardianship and custody, if one party is permitted to take the children abroad, the other party will be non-suited, as there is little scope for enforcing orders of an Indian Court in a foreign land. Moreover, India is not a signatory to the 1980 Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction (Hague Abduction O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 9 Convention) nor are there any bilateral agreement in force between India and Australia concerning international parental child abduction. 9. Going by Section 7(1) explanation (g) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and Section 9 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, it is manifestly clear that the suits and proceedings including the suit or proceeding where any question of guardianship of the person of any minor or his custody or access to him arises, whether governed by any personal law, or the provisions to the Guardian and Wards Act, would be cognizable only by the Family Court, if the matter arises within the area over which the jurisdiction is exercisable by the Family Court ( _Devilal Bhagat_ vs. _Rekha Bhagat_ (2008 (3) KLT S.N 14 (C.No.16)”. 3. After bestowing our attention to the concern of the parties, we are of the view that the matter requires an urgent disposal. In such circumstances, we are of the view that notwithstanding the impugned order, the Family Court shall dispose the original petition itself within a period of five weeks from today. 4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 09.06.2022 in regard to custody matter. So long as, the mother is available in India, the child O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 10 is permitted to reside with the mother subject to contact right to the father on every day through Whatsapp video call between 7.30 p.m. to 9 p.m. However, when the mother leaves India, the child has to be with the father subject to contact rights to mother. It is made clear that only this case regarding custody (GOP.No.178 of 2020) alone be directed to dispose. All other cases if any tagged along with this matter be de-linked. While the child is in the custody of the mother, we allow child to be in the company of the father on every Saturday between 02.00 p.m. to 04.00 p.m. at the premises of the Family Court, Irinjalakkuda. Sd/- **A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE** Sd/- **SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE** AS ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 11 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 272/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN G.O.P 178/2020, NOW PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 17/02/2020** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 5/2020 DATED 21/12/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 02/02/2021, IN I.A. NO.11/2021 AND I.A. NO.12/2021 IN I.A. NO.5/2020 IN G.O.P 178/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/02/2021 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 25/02/2021 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT IN I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 DATED 29/06/2021. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED 12/07/2021.** 12 ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 AND O.P.(F.C) 412/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED 12/10/2021** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/12/2021** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 11/01/2022** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 10/01/2022** **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 28/01/2022** **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER IN I.A NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 3/03/2022** **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.28/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 06/03/2022** - **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO I.A. NO.28/2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA** **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A 25/2021, I.A. 27/2022 AND I.A. 28/2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT,** 13 ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 ## **IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 22/03/2022** **EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022 EXHIBIT P17(A) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022 EXHIBIT P17(B) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 16/02/2022 EXHIBIT P17(C) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 28/02/2022** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 14 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 280/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN G.O.P 178/2020, NOW PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 17/02/2020** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 5/2020 DATED 21/12/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA** **EXHIBIT3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 02/02/2021, IN I.A. NO.11/2021 AND I.A. NO.12/2021 IN I.A. NO.5/2020 IN G.O.P 178/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/02/2021.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 25/02/2021** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT IN I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 DATED 29/06/2021.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED 12/07/2021.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 AND O.P.(F.C) 412/2021 PASSED BY** 15 ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 **THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED 12/10/2021** ## **EXHIBIT P9** **TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/12/2021** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 11/01/2022.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 10/01/2021.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 28/01/2022.** - **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER IN I.A NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 3/03/2022.** - **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.28/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 06/03/2022.** **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO I.A. NO.28/2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA.** **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A 25/2021, I.A. 27/2022 AND I.A. 28/2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 22/03/2022** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 16 **EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(A) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(B) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 16/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(C) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 28/02/2022** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 17 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 282/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN G.O.P 178/2020, NOW PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 17/02/2020.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 5/2020 DATED 21/12/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 02/02/2021, IN I.A. NO.11/2021 AND I.A. NO.12/2021 IN I.A. NO.5/2020 IN G.O.P 178/2020 BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/02/2021** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 25/02/2021** **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT IN I.A. NO.15/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 DATED 29/06/2021.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED 12/07/2021.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P(F.C) 344/2021 AND O.P.(F.C) 412/2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DATED** ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 18 **12/10/2021** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 04/12/2021** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.25/2021 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 11/01/2022 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 10/01/2022 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO I.A. NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 28/01/2022 EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER IN I.A NO.27/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 3/03/2022 EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.28/2022 IN G.O.P NO.178/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 06/03/2022** **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO I.A. NO.28/2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA. EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A 25/2021, I.A. 27/2022 AND I.A. 28/2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA DATED 22/03/2022.** 19 ## O.P.(F.C) Nos.272, 280 & 282 of 2022 **EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(A) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 14/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(B) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 16/02/2022.** **EXHIBIT P17(C) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORD OF THE MINOR FROM ASTER MEDICITY DATED 28/02/2022.**