Madras HC Sets Aside Order Requiring Wife To 'Serve Snacks' To Estranged Husband During Visitation

The bench of Justice Paresh Upadhyay and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that the single judge was swayed by what should be the conduct of the parties towards each other and that prescribing such stipulations was not relevant for deciding their rights.

We find that, learned Single Judge, while attempting to facilitate visitation, is swayed away by what should be the conduct of the parties towards each other, including serving of snacks / tea to the other side. We find that, prescribing such stipulations and many of the observations are less relevant for deciding the rights of the parties, or to address the grievances of the parties. The same therefore call for interference.

While deciding upon the visitation rights of the husband, the single judge had observed that the child needed affection from both the parents. Thus, the parents needed to create a happy atmosphere for the child.

It directed that even though the spouses may not consider each other as husband and wife due to personal indifference, they could still treat the visiting parent as an "Athithi" (Guest) and show kindness and empathy towards the guest.

When the matter came up in appeal, the wife submitted that the observations of the single judge did not decide upon the rights of the parties and rather preached what the wife needs to do to her husband. She further informed that she had obtained employment in Gurugram and had also secured admission for the child at a school there. Thus, it had become difficult for her to continue staying in Chennai and sought for modification of the order.

The husband however opposed the prayer and submitted that if the child was taken to Gurugram, it would be difficult for him to meet the child.

The court, noticing that the child had been residing with the wife throughout and keeping in view her education, held that it was necessary that the child be with her mother at Gurugram. This should however not be given a colour of defiance of court orders, it said.

The court set aside the order of the single judge and informed the father that he could explore the possibility of going to Gurugram if he so wishes, with prior intimation. In case of any difficulty, he was at liberty to approach an appropriate forum.

Case Title: Richa Sharma v. Ganesh Kasinathan

Case No: O.S.A.No.206 of 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 416

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr.R.Harikrishnan

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms.R.S.Akila for Ms.Sudha Ramalingam