Sophia Samuel v. Titus Samuel

Application No. 3389 of 2022 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

I am not inclined to pass any orders for psychological analysis and professional counseling for the child. This application has been filed by the mother. The child involved in the litigation is 14 years old and she is now in X standard. It would not be to her advantage to be put through a process of psychological analysis at this stage of her life. It will lead a deep scar.

2. The parents must lead evidence relating to their respective vision for the future of the child and not raise allegations against each other. The parents must realize that this is a court of records and after the child attains the age of majority, if the child wants to examine the records of this case and examines the allegations levelled by each of the parents against the other, then it will only affect the child further and more. That has to be prevented. It is the duty of both the parents to ensure to tender evidence giving their vision for future of the child and for the welfare of the child.

They can get orders depending only upon their respective stands taken with respect to their right to seek guardianship and custody of the child on permanent basis. This cannot be done by levelling allegations against the other.

3. Let evidence of the parents be recorded and on analysis of the evidence, and on examining the child in person, if the Court feels that the child requires further assistance, necessary orders shall be passed. This petition at this stage is superfluous and does not require any further orders of the Court.

4. With the above observations, this petition stands dismissed. 21.09.2022 Maya 2/3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

Maya Application No. 3389 of 2022 in O.P. No. 633 of 2020 Dated : 21.09.2022 3/3