Abu Dhabi-Based Father Gets Four Interim Daytime Visits With Son Despite Mother’s Objection To Weekend Hours: Madras HC

The father applied for interim custody/parenting time with his seven-year-old son on four November dates while visiting Chennai from Abu Dhabi.

The mother accepted that the father could have interim custody, as on previous occasions, but objected to the requested duration, raised concerns about the paternal grandparents’ influence and the child being taken outside the Court’s jurisdiction, and opposed a visit on 9 November unless the child’s school declared a holiday.

The Court considered the parties’ submissions and earlier interim-visitation orders.

The application invoked Order XIV Rule 8 of the Madras High Court Original Side Rules read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Court’s substantive reasoning rested on the child’s welfare and the principle that the child needs both parents; it stated that the child’s mind should not be poisoned or prejudiced against either parent.

The order cites no statutory custody provision or precedent.

The Court found no contention that the child was unwilling to spend time with his father and noted that previous visits had proceeded without difficulty, that the father regularly contacted the child, and that the mother had the child in her care except during court-ordered visits.

It therefore rejected the mother’s request to reserve half of the weekends for her and granted substantial daytime contact, adjusting the hours for Deepavali and the school day that would follow 9 November.

The Court balanced the father’s access against the mother’s concerns by prohibiting travel outside its territorial jurisdiction and medical or psychological examinations during the visits, and by directing the father and his parents not to make adverse references to the mother or create evidence for other proceedings.

If the child’s school declared 9 November a holiday, the father could have custody from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

The child was not to be taken outside the Court’s territorial jurisdiction or for medical or psychological examination during the visits; the father and his parents were directed not to speak ill of the mother or attempt to create evidence for other proceedings.