JUDGMENT : Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. After having argued the appeal on merits for some time, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant (wife/mother) prayed that during the pendency of this litigation, the appellant (wife/mother) despite having the orders in her favour from Foreign Courts in relation to the custody of her children, she has neither got the custody and nor has been able to meet and spend some time with them. Learned counsel, therefore, prayed that the appellant, who is residing in U.S.A, be allowed to meet her children on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent (father/husband) has no objection to give visitation rights to the appellant (wife/mother) for a short duration to enable her to meet and spend some time with her two minor children. Learned counsel, however, submitted that this Court may also consider it proper to interact with the children who are now quite matured (16 years) and secondly, this Court should fix venue of meeting at Kottayam (Kerala) where the respondent is residing with the two children rather than to any other place. 3. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the appellant, however, expressed some apprehension in fixing the meeting place at Kottayam. Learned counsel, on her part, suggested that instead of Kottayam, this Court, if consider it proper, may fix any other place such as Bangalore where the appellant's father is residing or Delhi or Mangalore, which is nearer to Kottayam. 4. To these places, learned counsel for the respondent expressed his reservations and reiterated that it should preferably be at Kottayam. 5. We heard the learned counsel including the appellant's father and the respondent who were present in person in Court. 6. Keeping in view the entire scenario, which we feel is rather unfortunate, and most importantly taking into consideration the welfare of the children and bearing in mind the feelings of love and affection of every mother for her children to whom she gives birth and at the same time appreciating the fine gesture shown by the respondent (husband) in not objecting to grant of such visitation rights, if given to the appellant, we consider it just and proper and in the interest of all family members to pass the following order: 1. The appellant (mother) is granted visitation rights to meet her two children, who are presently with the respondent. 2. The appellant (mother) is granted visitation rights to meet her two children, who are presently with the respondent. 2. The venue of meeting of the appellant with her two children would be at Mangalore. 3. The total duration of visiting rights to the appellant would be one week (7 days). 4. The timings to meet would be from 9.00 A.M to 9.00 P.M. every day. 5. The meeting would be at a place where the appellant would be staying in Mangalore - be that in a good Hotel or a residence, as the case may be, and at the discretion of the appellant. 6. During meeting hours, the respondent would not, in any manner, interfere or participate in the meetings between the appellant and the children. 7. During one week or till the appellant leaves India, the respondent would not try to enforce any order or directions issued by any Court/Authority against the appellant in any pending or/and decided case nor would create any embarrassing situation for the appellant and her parents. 8. Similarly the Appellant would not try to enforce any order or direction issued by any Court/Authority of United States of America or any other foreign country against the Respondent and their two children for whom the visitation rights are being given herein. 9. Needless to say, the appellant would be free to give any kind of gifts to the children of her choice and of the liking of the children. 10. Since the appellant has to arrange for Visa, Air Tickets etc. to visit India, she will accordingly inform her exact date of arrival in India and the date of reaching Mangalore well in advance to the respondent directly, or/and to the respondent's lawyer (Advocate-on-Record) through her lawyer (Advocate-on-Record) by e-mail so that the respondent and the children would be able to reach Mangalore well in time. 11. The appellant while fixing her dates of arrival in India would keep in mind the availability of the children during those days. 7. We have passed this order with the sincere hope that the appellant and the respondent, who are highly educated and matured enough, would understand and realize their duties and the obligations towards their children being father and mother though living separately. 7. We have passed this order with the sincere hope that the appellant and the respondent, who are highly educated and matured enough, would understand and realize their duties and the obligations towards their children being father and mother though living separately. Needless to say, both would maintain cordial relations in front of their children and avoid happening of any kind of untoward incident or/and avoid exhibiting any kind of unpleasant behavior in their verbal exchanges. Both must realize that such incident, if occurs and witnessed by the children, it would cause more harm to children and affect their innocent minds. They may even loose respect for their parents. 8. In our view, both must realize that the main object of the meeting is to allow the children to meet their mother in a most dignified, congenial and happy atmosphere. The respondent should, therefore, ensure that such meeting brings some kind of happiness to their children and mother. The respondent for his self interest should not try to tutor the children something adverse about their mother. On the other hand, we would appreciate if the respondent takes positive initiative in telling the children about their mother especially coming to India to meet them and that they (children) should welcome her and spend some good time with her. 9. In our opinion, both should equally realize that the children were deprived of the company of mother without their fault but only due to parents' infighting, who failed to realize the adverse effects of their fighting on their children upbringing. Their infighting has equally deprived the members of the family, individually and collectively to enjoy the happiness, peace and harmony. 10. In our considered view, both must further realize that the children need love and affection of mother and father constantly and not individually because it is the parents who are responsible to bring their children in this World. Both must realize that mother cannot perform the role of a father so is the father who cannot perform the role of mother. 11. So far as the mother's role towards her child is concerned, it is more pivotal because she gives birth to her child. She is, therefore, capable of giving more love, affection and good training to her child. 12. 11. So far as the mother's role towards her child is concerned, it is more pivotal because she gives birth to her child. She is, therefore, capable of giving more love, affection and good training to her child. 12. We are compelled to make these observations because we noticed, on perusal of the record and also during hearing of the case, that relations between the parties and their family members are not cordial with no respect to each other. 13. We hope that some good thing will come out of this meeting for the children, who are unfortunately the victims of their parents' infighting. 14. Sometimes, the short happiness brings some good things in one's life as the saying goes, `real happiness lies in making others happy'. Let us hope that it may happen in this case. 15. The hearing of the appeal is adjourned.