kersi jamshed divecha vs. hutoxi kersi divecha

Case Type: NaN

Date of Judgment: 07-02-2008

Preview image for kersi  jamshed divecha  vs.  hutoxi kersi divecha

Full Judgment Text

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM PETITION NO.2 OF 2008
IN
SUIT NO.5 OF 2006
Mrs. Hutoxi M. Panthaki ...Petitioner
Vs.
Mr. Kersi J. Divecha  ...Respondent
Ms. Sanober P. Nanavati for Petitioner
Ms. Anusuya Dutt for Respondent 
CORAM:  SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.
ND
                           DATED:   2  JULY, 2008
P.C.
1.  The parties are wife and husband.  They have 2 children,
sons named Jehan and Sheroy. They shall be referred to as
mother and father.
2.  They applied for divorce by mutual consent in the above
th
suit on 20  February, 2006. They filed consent terms.  In the
consent terms the mother gave up her claim to alimony or
maintenance.  She also gave up custody of both the children.
The father was to have custody of both the children.   The
mother was to have access on second and fourth week ends
and half school vacations. 
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

2
3.  The parties were married in 1992.  Children were born
in 1992 and 1998.  The mother left the matrimonial home in
2004.  They filed the divorce petition in 2006.  The mother
remarried in 2007. 
4.  At the time of the filing of the consent terms Jehan was
13 years and Sheroy was 7 years old.  Jehan was studying in
standard VIII and Sheroy was studying in Standard IV.  
5.  The mother did not take access to the children in the
school vacations in 2006.
6.  It is her contention that, that was because she did not
want to disturb the children's studies.   She married soon
thereafter.   She has now settled with her new husband in
Vikroli.  She claimed access during the last summer vacation
of May, 2008.  She was to hand over custody of the children
to the father at the end of the May vacation.   She did not
hand over the custody as per the consent terms signed by
them.  She instead filed this Petition for modification of the
consent terms. She has applied for grant of custody  and
change of school of the children. 
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

3
7.  On the face of the consent terms she is in breach.  The
Consent terms came to be a part of the order of the Court.
Having breached that order, she is in contempt.   It need
hardly be mentioned that she should have abided the order
of the Court and returned the children to the custody of the
father   pending   any   application   for   modification   of   the
consent terms made by her.  She has not done that on the
ground   that   the   children   never   wanted   to   return   to   the
father.
8.  This change of heart has come at a very late stage.  It
has come after her remarriage and after she has settled with
her new husband.  It has come after the children were left to
be cared for by the father for about 4 years.  The father has
not remarried.  He lives with his mother and his two children
at Parel.  She lives with her present husband at Vikroli.  
9.  When she left the husband in 2004 she lived with her
parents at Thane.   She has stated that she did not take
custody of the children then, because her parents' house
was small in area.
10.  The   father   has   contended,   and   primafacie   justifiably,
that  she  did  not take   custody of   the  children  before  her
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

4
marriage whilst she wanted to be alone and away from her
children.  It was during those times that the father cared for
the children and kept their custody.  He contends that now
she   has   well   settled.     She   has   sought   to   take   away   the
children to be used as her investment as she has advanced
in age.
11.  Various allegations are made by her in the Petition to
show how the father is unfit to have custody of the children.
This   is   despite   the   fact,   that   upon   whatever   was   the
dispossession of the father, she had allowed him to have
custody of the children in the consent terms and obtained
the divorce and remarried thereafter. 
12.  She  has   produced  xerox  copies   of   certain   documents
showing expenses incurred for the children.   Most of the
documents are of the year 2008.  It is seen that during the
summer vacation when she kept custody of the children she
incurred   certain   expenses.   That   is   natural.     She   has
produced certain bills of certain stores showing purchase of
materials.  These do not show who purchased the goods and
for whom.  She claims that the father did not incur sufficient
medical   expenses   for   medical   treatment   of   the   children,
which she has done.   The father has produced copies of
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

5
medical prescriptions and bills showing what he has done for
the children.  It is not understood how both the parties lay
so much emphasis upon medical treatment for the children
over other expenses. 
13.  No complaint was made about what the father failed and
neglected  to   do  in   the   year   2006   or   2007.     The   first
complaint   has   been   made   in   this   Petition   itself.     The
allegations of the mother go thus far.
14.  The Petition has come up before me on a number of
occasions since the reopening of the Court after summer
vacation.   I have interviewed the children, and the parents
singly as well as jointly.  I found that the children are highly
stressed,   anxious   and   nervous.     I   have   stated   my
observations in earlier orders.
15.  I   deemed   it   fit   that   both   the   parties   as   well   as   the
children   need   counselling.     I   sent   them   to   the   child
Counsellor / child specialist from the Tata Institute of Social
Services   (TISS)   who   serve   at   the   Family   Court,   Mumbai
through the NGO, “MUSKAAN”. The child specialist/ senior
Counsellor   Ms.Freny   Italia   and   junior   Counsellor   Ms.
Swapna   Redij,   have   counselled   the   children   on   atleast   3
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

6
occasions.  The parents have also been interviewed by them.
The   father   was   directed   to   obtain   access   to   his   children
pending this Petition whilst the children were allowed to be
with the mother, despite the breach of the consent terms
th
dated 20   February, 2006 to maintain the status­quo that
prevailed at the time of the Petition.
16.  The option of sending the children to boarding school, in
which they would be away from the strained relationship of
both the parents,  with their friends and where both parents
can have equal access to them, was considered.  The option
has not materialised.
17.  The Counsellor submitted an interim report, copies of
which were given to both the parties.  Further counselling of
the   children   was   done   thereafter   also.     The   mother   has
allowed access as directed.  The father has taken access in
the   presence   of   the   Counsellors.     The   Counsellors   have
submitted a further report to Court today.  The report inter
alia shows the following aspects:­
i) Children  had  overcome their initial resistance to the
father and had began interacting with him and the
grandmother.
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

7
ii)  Jehan cares for his father and his grandmother
though there is no overt display.
iii)  He   yearns   for   greater   attention   and   display   of
affection   from   his   father,   whom   he   feels   loves   his
brother more.
iv)  The   children   are   strained   due   to   parental
differences.
v)   The   father   is   strict   and   disciplined   them  which
makes Jehan rebel.
vi)  Sheroy can be easily influenced.
vii)  He gets bullied at school.
viii)  There is a strong  bond between the brothers.
ix)  The children seem to be heavily influenced by
the   mother   as   was   apparent   in   their   talk   and
tone,   which   was   identical   to   what   the   mother
shared or expressed.
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

8
x)   The father provided well for the children for their
education and basic needs.
xi)  He needs counselling.
xii)  There is no reason to doubt that he will not
continue to provide for his children in the future.
xiii)   The mother was now in a position to take care
of   her   children   and   cites   this   as   her   earlier
reason for giving away custody of the children to
the father.
xiv)  Both parents instigate the children.
xv)  Jehan   has   taken   the   role   of   the   mother's
confidante,   which   is   unhealthy   for   his   emotional
development.
18.  Both the parents, the present husband of the mother as
well as the grandmother have attended my chamber on all
the dates of hearing.   The children attended once before.
They have attended today.
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

9
19.  Jehan   expressed   his   desire   to   speak   to   me.     I   have
allowed him to speak to me.  He has parrot­like narrated the
facts   and   allegation   urged   by   his   mother,   argued   by   his
Advocate and stated in this interim application.
20.  It   may   be   mentioned   that   when   I   interviewed   the
children, I had not asked them directly when they would
want   to   live   with.   That   would   have   been   the   most
inappropriate question.  Children in the custody of one of the
parents, and more so when there is so much resistance and
acrimony   between   them,   are   essentially   and   considerably
tutored.  That is the case in this Petition also.  That has been
specifically noted by the Counsellors as shown in item No.ix
above.
21.  Sheroy also spoke to me. He was more brief.  He stated
what he would want.   In short, without being questioned,
and on their own desire the children stated that they wanted
to be with the mother.
22.  This is hardly a sagacious, informed choice.  It is more
apparent in view of the fact that Jehan spoke at length and
exactly as his mother had stated earlier as has been noticed
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

10
by the Counsellors also.  It would be most inappropriate and
improper to consider that as the choice of the children.  The
Court   has   to   determine   the   interest   and   welfare   of   the
children.     The   Court   may   interview   the   children.     The
interviewing   must   be   in   keeping   with   the   circumstances.
The Court must try to ascertain upon asking questions and
obtaining   answers,   the   true   position   of   the   children,
emotionally   as   well   mentally   and   determine     where   their
interest  and welfare is.    It  has been held  in  the case of
Thirty   Hoshie   Dolikuka   Vs.   Hoshiam   Shevaksha
Dolikuka,  that :­
“where the child is not in a position to express
any   intelligent   preference   between   his/her
parents,   as   in   this   case,   mature   thinking   is
necessary   to   decide   as   to   what   will   enure   to
his/her benefit and welfare.  In such a situation
therefore,   it   is   not   necessary   to   send   for   the
minor and interview her to ascertain her wishes
before proceeding to decide the question of her
custody.  Personal interview of the child is also
to   be   avoided   when   she   is   torn   between   the
affection for both parents and such interviewing
would   further   cause   depression   and
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

11
      
demoralisation in her mind.”
23.  Giving the custody of the children to the parent who has
kept custody upon hearing a parrot­like statement cannot
determine the child's welfare.  I do not mean to suggest that
the   welfare   of   the   children   would   not   be   heeded   by   the
mother in this case.   She has married a very reasonable
person.  He has attended Court on every date of hearing.  I
have spoken to him also along with the mother.  It is to his
credit that the father has not made allegations of what the
mother or her husband did not do.  
24.  However,   what   is   important   in   this   case   is   that   the
children have been well cared for by the father for 4 years
whilst the mother essentially abandoned them. Whatever be
her justification, the fact remained that the father was the
single parent for a number of years.  There was no complaint
and   no   application.     The   situation   of   change   of   heart,
therefore,   cannot   show   the   demerits   of   the   father's
upbringing. 
25.  The fact remains that the mother is in breach of the
th
Court's order as reflected in the consent terms dated 20
February, 2006.  The father has  complained of the breach
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

12
th
from 10  June when he was denied custody.  The children
have been brain­washed by the mother during this period.
The   children   deserve   the   love   and   affection   of   both   the
parents.   They must in turn love both the parents.   Any
upbringing which runs counter to these basic principles is
itself against the interest and welfare of the child and must
be eschewed.
26.  In this case the further fact is the breach of the order
already   passed   and   coupled   with   the   mother's   initial
abandonment.
27.   Since all the allegations made against the father are not
substantiated at all,   the case for modification rests only
upon the change of mind and the change of heart of the
mother.  In that case the mode exercised by her is seen to be
completely incorrect.  The children must be given a chance
and an opportunity to be with the father to obtain the best
out of him.  The children must continue with their access to
the mother as before to obtain the best out of her.
28.  Both the parents have been seen to be instigating the
children as is reflected in Clause XIV of the Counsellor's
report extracted above.  In fact the father is advised further
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

13
Counselling   as   is   reflected   in   Clause   XI   extracted   above.
This   would   be   more   so   as   the   children   consider   him
extremely strict, a fact easily observed by this Court also.
Similarly because both the parents are seen to be instigating
the children, a fact noted by this Court also, they would need
a   further   counselling   to   win   over   the   children,   specially
Jehan, who believes his father does not love him as much as
his brother.  However, there is no one else the children can
go to.  None is seen to be particularly better than the other.
29.    Despite   my   entreaties   and   observations,   I   have   not
found any improvement in the upbringing of the mother as is
reflected in the Counsellors' last report shown to me today,
which   shows   how   the   children   have   been  
“heavily
  by the mother as reflected in clause IX of the
influenced”
report extracted above.
30.  This   is   not   the   case   in   which   the   Petition   can   be
disposed of by way of a final order.   In Custody matters
modification   of   the   order   is   the   rule   rather   than   the
exception. However, modification must be in accordance with
law and upon obeying of the law.  Breach of orders cannot be
lightly allowed in the name of modification except if gross
acts of neglect or demerits of a parent having custody are
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

14
shown. Hence, the following order:
                                    ORDER   
1.The custody of the children is restored to the father.
2.The children Jehan and Sheroy are directed to go
with their father to his home.
3.Both   the   children   as   well   as   the   father   shall
continue to be counselled by the same Counsellors.
They shall go for counselling Sessions on Tuesdays,
Thursdays   and   Saturdays   as   before.     This   shall
continue for a period of 1 month.
4.The father shall pay the  Counsellors' fees for each
counselling  session   as   determined   by   the
Counsellors.  
5.The   other   terms   between   the   parties   remain
unchanged.  The children, however, will be entitled
to talk with the Mother on telephone whenever they
desire.
6.The  Counsellor  shall submit further report to the
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::

15
Court at the end of  one month from today.  Since
the children feel that the father is very strict and has
on occasions   beaten them, the father is specially
adivsed to be milder with the children:
7.The   further   future   custody   shall   be   determined
based upon the Counsellors' further report.
8.The children have been explained this order by the
Court.
                                                  (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)
::: Downloaded on - 26/06/2024 07:32:33 :::