JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner-mother is assailing the order passed by the Family Court, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-M. The respondent-father made an application under Section 26 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 seeking custody of the minor child Rahul during the winter vacation, which commences from 20/12/2009 to 3/01/2010. The learned Family Judge has granted the said application. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are several factual errors and mistakes of fact committed by the learned Family Judge. He further submits that the petitioner-mother and the Counsel were made to believe that the matter is likely to be settled. But however, an application is moved. Nevertheless, he submits that the minor child Rahul can stay with the respondent-rather on 29th and 30th of this month. 3. Mr. Kesthur N. Chandrashekar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-father submits that there should not be any impediment for the child to stay with the father during the winter vacation inasmuch as the child would be with the mother all throughout. He further submits that in the alternate, the child can stay with the father, at least for the first half of the vacation. 4. I have ascertained the views of the child. Apparently, if at all the child Rahul wants to stay with his father, he proposes to go only for all two days i.e., on 29th and 30th of this month. But however, having regard to the observations made by this court in the earlier writ petition i.e., 6481 of 2006 decided on 11th August, 2006 wherein this court has expressed anguish about the well-being of the child, I am of the view that if the minor child Rahul is to stay with his father from 28th to 31st of December, that would meet the requirement for the present. The child shall be picked up from the residence of the petitioner-mother on 28/12/2009 morning at 10.30 a.m. and shall be dropped at the same place i.e., the petitioner-mother’s residence on 31/12/2009 at 5.30 p.m. with this modification, petition stands disposed of. An assurance is given by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that this part of the order will be complied. Parties to act on the direction issued in this order, but shall not wait for the certified copy. An assurance is given by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that this part of the order will be complied. Parties to act on the direction issued in this order, but shall not wait for the certified copy. The Family Court shall conclude the proceedings at the earliest within an outer limit if six months from the date of receipt of this order.