Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 265 (HP)

Sangita Sharma v. Rohit Kalia

2021-04-25

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

body2021
JUDGMENT : Vivek Singh Thakur, J. Contesting parties herein are husband and wife, who are parents of one son and hereinafter, for convenience, they shall be referred as husband and wife or father and mother as the reference may be. 2. Undisputed facts in present case are that marriage between Rohit Kalia (husband) and Sangita Sharma (wife) was solemnized on 25.4.2012 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. Marital life of couple was neither healthy nor happy, however out of wedlock, couple was blessed with son ‘Yuvan Kalias alias Aadvik Sharma’ on 28.10.2014, who, as such, now is about 6 and ½ years old. 3. For bitterness in relations for so many reasons, husband and wife had initiated various proceedings under various enactments against each other but involving other family members also. 4. Wife had preferred complaint under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, complaint converted into FIR No. 284 of 2015 under Sections 406, 498-A IPC, registered in Police Station, Haroli, petition for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and a petition for divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) and 13 (1)(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage in Courts at Una. Whereas husband had also initiated a civil suit against wife and a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights in Civil Court, Chandigarh and also a petition under Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 at Una for custody of child and a Contempt Petition No. 332 of 2017, titled Rohit Kalia Vs. Sangita Sharma in this High Court. 5. In petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., learned Judicial Magistrate had awarded interim maintenance to wife and child amounting to Rs.10,000/- each, which was reduced by learned Sessions Judge in Cr. Revision No. 62 of 2015, preferred by husband. Against reduction of interim maintenance, wife had approached this Court by way of Cr.MMO No. 191 of 2016. 6. Pending adjudication Cr.MMO No. 191 of 2016, matter was referred for mediation, and during mediation proceedings husband and wife had agreed not to pursue the issue involved in Cr.MMO No.191 of 2016 and also other matters pending intra them and it was agreed to close all the matters pending in various Courts against each other with further understanding that in HMA No. 166 of 2017 pending in the Court of District Judge, Una, titled Sangita Sharma Vs. Rohit Kalia decree for mutual divorce will be passed between the parties by this High Court on the basis of settlement arrived at and all other matters referred supra and also appeals, revisions, applications etc. arising thereto shall be deemed to have been withdrawn without any further consequence and adjudication as a result of compromise and parties were granted liberty to place on record the compromise in various Courts. 7. With reference to custody of minor child (son) of parties, it has been agreed that his custody will continue to remain with wife Sangita Sharma (mother of child), who has voluntarily, out of her own will, has agreed and undertaken to bear all legal obligation for maintenance, upbringing and ensuring the welfare of minor till he attains the age of majority without claiming any financial and other contribution of any kind from the husband (father of son) or his parents or any other relatives, except as agreed in terms of settlement. As per settlement husband (father) has undertaken to deposit an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- in the name of minor child identifying him as Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma, by way of Fixed Deposit Receipt which shall not be withdrawn/encashed till the minor son attains the age of majority, i.e. 18 years. However, the periodical interest earned from the said FDR will be released to wife (mother) Ms.Sangita Sharma for utilization thereof exclusively on the welfare and upbringing of child and on attaining age of majority, son will be entitled to encash and withdraw the amount from the concerned bank with entitlement to use and utilize the same at his own discretion. 8. 8. Clauses 9 and 10 of terms and conditions of settlement deal with visitation rights of non-custodial parent and in clause 9 it has been agreed that father of child will have visitation rights to meet his minor child on second and fourth Saturdays and Sundays of every month at 2:30 P.M. on Saturdays and 11:00 A.M. on Sundays for a duration of 2½ hours and the husband will be at liberty to exercise such rights singly or jointly with his parents, but in absence and to the exclusion of mother Sangita Sharma, her parents and all her relatives for a duration of 1 hour and the child, if taken to any other place during said 1 hour, shall have to be handed over back safely to the custody of mother and/or her parents, whosoever brings the child to the appointed location mentioned in this clause. 9. In clause 10 of settlement, it has been re-iterated and accepted between the parties that right of visitation 4 times in a month, as above, is the absolute right created, which will not be altered for any reason, however, parties have been given liberty to approach the High Court of Himachal Pradesh for variation, alteration or modification of terms and conditions, mechanism and mode of exercising the right of visitation, including custody on account of legal disability of mother. 10. Besides above, it was also agreed that child/son of parties shall be known and identified by the name of ‘Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma’ by recording it accordingly whereever so required as father has named him as ‘Yuvan Kalia’, whereas mother has named him as ‘Aadvik Sharma’. 11. Cr.MMO No. 191 of 2016 has been disposed of in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties and the petition filed by wife being HMA No. 166 of 2017 has been ordered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.8.2018, to be called to this Court for passing appropriate order therein, in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties. 12. 12. In the meanwhile, after disposal of Cr.MMO No. 191 of 2016, husband, on 18.8.2018, has preferred Cr.M.P. No. 1183 of 2018 with averments that wife has not taken steps for correcting the name of child in Aadhar Card to reflect it as ‘Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma’ and she is not handing over documents with corrected name, to the father of child, enabling him to deposit the amount in terms of settlement against complete correct name of the child, as agreed between the parties and also that mother of child is not permitting the father of child to exercise his right of visitation for non deposit of amount in Fixed Deposit Receipt as per terms of the settlement. 13. Pending adjudication this application, father has deposited Rs.3,50,000/- in the Registry of this Court, which has been invested by the Registry in terms of settlement as recorded in order dated 16.11.2018 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 1183 of 2018, referred supra. On 4.1.2019, co-ordinate Bench of this court had again directed to call for record of HMA Petition No. 166 of 2017 from the court of learned District Judge, Una for listing the same before appropriate Bench for passing appropriate orders in terms of settlement. 14. For tone and tenor of the order passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and also for terms and conditions of the settlement, petition HMA No. 166 of 2017, titled Sangita Sharma Vs. Rohit Kalia was to be transferred to High Court for passing appropriate order for dissolution of marriage of parties with mutual consent. Instead thereof record has been requisitioned and petition is alive and pending in the Court of learned District Judge, Una. Be that as it may, in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties and subsequent orders passed by co-ordinate bench of this Court, petition HMA No. 166 of 2017 is to be disposed of by passing a decree of dissolution of marriage between parties as agreed. Original side jurisdiction to decide such petition is with learned District Judge. Therefore, learned District Judge has to decide the HMA No. 166 of 2017 by treating it as a petition for mutual divorce as agreed by parties in amicable settlement. 15. Original side jurisdiction to decide such petition is with learned District Judge. Therefore, learned District Judge has to decide the HMA No. 166 of 2017 by treating it as a petition for mutual divorce as agreed by parties in amicable settlement. 15. With respect to updating the name of child in the Aadhar Card as ‘Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma’, it has been pleaded on behalf of mother that despite making all out efforts by her, the concerned authority i.e. Aadhar Sampark Kendra, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), did not carry out correction on the ground that in the Date of Birth Certificate UID No. of son has already been mentioned and in the said certificate name of the son has been recorded as ‘Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma’ and therefore, it is sufficient to establish that name of Aadvik Sharma is Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma in the record and the same can be used for any other purpose. Husband has also placed on record certain documents claiming that correction in the name of a person in Aadhar Card is permissible two times as notified by the Government of India, Ministry of Electronics and IT Unique Identification Authority of India (Enrolment & Update Division) vide Office Memoranda dated 24.9.2018, 7.2.2019 and 1.4.2019. Leaving rival claims of parties apart, to resolve the issue, wife (mother of the child) is directed to handover the original Aadhar Card, date of birth certificate and other relevant documents like bank passbook etc. to father of the child as directed herein after in this order. 16. An application Cr.M.P. No. 413 of 2019 has been filed in March, 2019 by father for weekend custody of child, right to attend Parent Teacher Meet, correction of name in Aadhar Card and right to know the location of child and his school in terms of Child Access & Custody Guidelines and Parenting Plan, which has been duly approved by this High Court. 17. Cr.M.P. No. 686 of 2020 has been filed in May, 2020 by father seeking direction to mother of the child, permitting the father to have electronic contact with minor child on his mobile as well as E-mail ID, during the period of complete lockdown in the year 2020. 17. Cr.M.P. No. 686 of 2020 has been filed in May, 2020 by father seeking direction to mother of the child, permitting the father to have electronic contact with minor child on his mobile as well as E-mail ID, during the period of complete lockdown in the year 2020. After lifting of restrictions of lockdown, father had again approached this Court by filing Cr.MP No. 1696 of 2020 seeking direction to mother to permit the father to meet his child as per visiting rights as agreed between the parties which is reflected in order dated 21.4.2018. 18. Contempt Petition No. 81 of 2019 has also been filed by father on the ground that in the month of April, 2019, father was not allowed to exercise his visitation rights to meet the minor child as agreed between the parties and thus mother is liable to be punished for contempt of Court for willful and intentional disobedience of undertaking given by her to the Court. 19. In response to the applications and Contempt Petition, the stand of mother is that she has utmost respect for the judicial system and cannot even think to disobey the order passed by the Court and she is regularly following directions of the Court, including the terms of settlement and regularly performing her part of performance and to substantiate her claim, she has also placed on record certain photographs. 20. Father has also placed on record certain photographs and has contended that photographs placed on record by mother are old one pertaining to period of November, 2018 and May, 2019 and has claimed that from the photographs placed on record by him, it is evident that mother is not allowing free access of the child to the father. 21. Learned counsel for the mother has also contended that prayers made with respect to visitation rights, beyond the scope of settlement, are not maintainable and father can exercise visitation rights in accordance with clause 9 of terms and conditions of settlement and not beyond that. Whereas, learned counsel for the father has submitted that as per clause 10 of settlement, parties have been given liberty to approach the High Court for variation, alteration or modification thereof. 22. Whereas, learned counsel for the father has submitted that as per clause 10 of settlement, parties have been given liberty to approach the High Court for variation, alteration or modification thereof. 22. No doubt clause 9 of settlement provides the terms in which visitation rights are to be exercised by the father and clause 10, in the beginning, provides that right of visitation for four times in a month as above is the absolute right granted, which will not be altered for any reason. But at the same time clause 10 also permits the parties to approach the Court for variation, alteration or modification of terms mechanism and mode of exercise the right of visitation including custody on account of legal disability of mother. On combined reading of terms and conditions contained in clauses 9 and 10, it can be undoubtedly inferred that right of visitation for four times in a month will not be altered for any reason, but the mode and manner in which the said right is to be exercised can be varied, altered or modified. Therefore, in my opinion the terms and conditions to exercise visitation rights contained in clause 9 can be varied, altered and modified, but frequency of visitation cannot be less than four times in a month as it has been termed as an absolute right granted in favour of father and both parties have right to approach the Court for variation, alteration or modification of terms, as provided in clause 10 of the settlement. 23. In Child Access and Custody Guidelines and Parenting Plan, drafted by Child Rights Foundation NGO, approved by this High Court in the year 2014 and communicated to all District and Sessions Judges to enforce these recommendations in their respective divisions, in Section 31, it has been observed as under:- “OVER NIGHT ACCESS : Court’s are under obligation to consider the child spending equal time, or substantial and significant time, with each parent. In making a parenting order the court ‘must consider’ making orders that the child spend equal time, or if not equal then substantial and significant time, with each parent. In making a parenting order the court ‘must consider’ making orders that the child spend equal time, or if not equal then substantial and significant time, with each parent. ‘Substantial and significant time’ is defined to mean, essentially, weekdays and overnight weekends and holidays, times that allow the parent to be involved in the child’s daily routine as well as occasions and events that are of particular significance to the child or the parent child to maintain or consolidate a secure attachment with a parent whose behavior is oriented only to ‘visiting’ rather than ‘care-giving’. •?Children have the right to know and be cared for by both their parents, regardless of whether their parents are married, separated, divorced, have never married or have never lived together; and •?Children have a right to spend time on a regular basis with, and communicate on a regular basis with, both their parents and other people significant to their care, welfare and development (such as grandparents and other immediate family members & relatives); and •?Children have a right to enjoy their culture (including the right to enjoy that culture with other people who share that culture). Over Night Access at home of the non-custodial parent should be encouraged at an early stage so that the children have a close and continuing relationship and get the love, affection of not only parents but also of grandparents and other immediate family members like uncle, aunties, cousins etc. The healthy emotional development of children depends upon their early experience of a continuous, emotionally available care-giving relationship, through which they are able to form an organized attachment, and to develop their human capacities for thought and relationships essentially. Children have their right to childhood of hopeful existence free of exploitations, neglect. Children need constant support system as well as love, hope and encouragement, all these things and more are required in order to experience childhood to the fullest and to eventually develop into a healthy, capable adult for the full and hormonal development of his or her personality children should grow up in a family environment in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding which is very important for their overall growth and well being. The children should be fully prepared to live life in society, in the spirit, dignity tolerance, freedom, equality and solidarity. The children should be fully prepared to live life in society, in the spirit, dignity tolerance, freedom, equality and solidarity. However, young children are subjected to exploitation especially in a broken marriage where the court has to intervene to protect the rights of the child. Children have to be ensured that their right to parental access, right to quality of life, right to be cared for, and right to freedom of expression is not compromised and children get love and affection from both parents and grandparents and immediate family members. They should have a sense of belonging to a healthy family environment maintaining their heritage so that the genealogy of the child is not lost after attaining adulthood and they are able to be linked with their ancestors. Overnight access should, therefore, be encouraged at an early stage.” 24. Section 30 of these Guidelines also provides that excess schedule for access for the child of parent can vary as per convenience of the parties by presenting a petition before the Court. Chapter 3 provides local guidelines with respect to parties residing within 200 driving kilometers of each other, part D whereof contains provision with respect to final visitation regarding children of 36 months and older. It provides that non-custodial parent shall be entitled for weekend visitation on every weekend, weekday visitation, right of to spend at least four hours on the holiday or festival day and festivals weekend overnight access, right to spend 50% of each vacation during long vacations like Diwali, Christmas, summer, winter etc. Chapter 4 of Guidelines contains Non-Local Guidelines with respect to parties, not residing within 200 driving kilometers of each other. It also provides at least one weekend vacation on every week, right to spend holidays, celebrate religious holiday, right to spend 50% of long vacation such as Diwali, Christmas and summer and winter. Paramount consideration in all eventualities must be welfare of the child. 25. In present case family of father is situated at Chandigarh whereas mother is residing in district Una, which are at a distance of about 120 kilometers from each other. Paramount consideration in all eventualities must be welfare of the child. 25. In present case family of father is situated at Chandigarh whereas mother is residing in district Una, which are at a distance of about 120 kilometers from each other. However father is not serving at Chandigarh, but somewhere else and as such present case is not totally covered either by guidelines framed for parties either residing within 200 driving kilometres or beyond 200 driving kilometers and, therefore, by maintaining balance, best suitable visiting rights, keeping in view the welfare and interest of child and also convenience of parties, are to be granted to non custodial parent (father) by considering rival contention of parties with respect to terms and conditions of visiting rights sought to be altered, modified or varied. 26. As stated in the Guidelines quoted supra, the Supreme Court, in a case titled Anuj Chaturvedi vs. Jyoti, Special Leave Petition (C) No(s) 6303/2017, decided on 4.1.2019 has also observed that visiting rights are to be fixed in such a manner that child gets to know and love his father. The order reads as under:- “We are not inclined to interfere in the order granting custody of the child to the mother. The special leave petition is dismissed according. However, we give liberty to the petitioner to approach the Family Court for enactment of his visitation rights and we direct the Family Court to ensure that visitation rights are fixed in such a manner that the child gets to know and love his father. A child has a right to the affection of both his parents and the Family Court shall ensure that visitation rights are granted in such a manner. The Family Court may also make suitable arrangements for visitation/interim custody during vacation periods. Obviously the Family Court has to keep the interest of the child at the foremost. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.” 27. The Supreme Court, in another case titled Tanuj Dhawan Vs. Court in its own Motion, Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 11058 of 2020 decided on 30.4.2020, has suggested that where because of lockdown children are unable to interact with their parents, despite existence of visiting rights for the said purpose, electronic contact, instead of physical visits, can be substituted in such times. Court in its own Motion, Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 11058 of 2020 decided on 30.4.2020, has suggested that where because of lockdown children are unable to interact with their parents, despite existence of visiting rights for the said purpose, electronic contact, instead of physical visits, can be substituted in such times. It has further been observed that in absence of mutually acceptable arrangement in this behalf, aggrieved party can approach the family Court. 28. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, Child Access and Custody Guidelines and Parenting Plan, observations of the Supreme Court and material placed before me, all these applications along with Contempt Petition are disposed of in following terms:- (i) Rohit Kalia (father of minor child, non custodial parent) shall have visiting rights to meet minor child at Municipal Park, Una or any other mutually agreed place on every second and fourth Saturday at 2:30 P.M. and second and fourth Sunday at 11:00 A.M. for a duration of 2½ hours, every month. (ii) Rohit Kalia (father of child) shall also have overnight weekend custodial visitation right w.e.f. 2:00 P.M. on fourth Saturday till 4:00 P.M. of fourth Sunday of every alternative month, i.e. once in two months. Frequency of weekend custodial/overnight visitation right may be rescheduled in future by Family Court/District Court, depending upon prevailing circumstances including age of the child. (iii) Rohit Kalia and his parents, jointly or singly, shall have right to exercise the right of visitation in aforesaid terms and out of total duration of 2½ hours they shall have exclusive visitation right for one hour in absence of and to the exclusion of mother as well as her parents and all other relatives, during each weekend visitation, but, for entire overnight weekend visitation. (iv) Custody of child shall be handed over by mother Sangita Sharma or her parents to father Rohit Kalia on the date and time fixed aforesaid in presence of Coordinator of Mediation Center or Para Legal Volunteer, District Court Una, at Municipal Park, Una or any other mutually acceptable place duly notified to the Coordinator/Para Legal Volunteer well in advance at least 2 days before. (v) On expiry of time of visitation period, father Rohit Kalia shall ensure safe handing over of custody of child to his mother or her parents, whosoever brings the child to the appointed location in the same manner. (v) On expiry of time of visitation period, father Rohit Kalia shall ensure safe handing over of custody of child to his mother or her parents, whosoever brings the child to the appointed location in the same manner. (vi) Mother of child (custodial parent) shall not conceal the whereabouts of the child from father. Similarly father during overnight visitation period shall not conceal whereabouts of the place where child would be taken. Child shall be made available for telephonic conversation by the parent in custody to other parent. (vii) On change of place of residence, school, telephone number, on which communication of non-custodial parent with the child is being made, mother of the child shall notify the same to the father of the child telephonically/ through message within 24 hours and in writing within 72 hours of the change. (viii) Father is also permitted to participate in Parents Teachers meetings and mother of the child shall notify the date thereof immediately after receiving information from the school in this regard, so as to enable father to attend the Meeting, if possible to him. (ix) Father shall be permitted to have telephonic communication with the child at least on every Tuesday, Friday and Sunday between 8:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. or any other time mutually agreed between the parents, except the Sundays on which right of visitation is exercised physically. In case child desires to have communication daily, then every day he shall be permitted to have such communication with his father at least for 3 to 5 minutes. (x) In case during period of lockdown, curfew or other similar kind of restrictions imposed by the Government on account of prevailing Covid-19 pandemic or otherwise for any other reason, exercise of visitation rights is not possible physically then on the appointed days i.e. Second and Fourth Saturdays and Sundays, father shall have right to have telephonic communication for a longer period not less than 20 minutes in lieu of physical/overnight weekend visitation right. This communication shall be in addition to the routine telephonic communication. (xi) Parents, though separated, but have to communicate with each other for welfare and development of balanced personality of child and, therefore, Contempt Petition COPC No. 81 of 2019 is also closed to maintain and continue peaceful and harmonious working arrangement between them, without adjudicating it on merits. This communication shall be in addition to the routine telephonic communication. (xi) Parents, though separated, but have to communicate with each other for welfare and development of balanced personality of child and, therefore, Contempt Petition COPC No. 81 of 2019 is also closed to maintain and continue peaceful and harmonious working arrangement between them, without adjudicating it on merits. (xii) In case exercise of visitation right is to be suspended or cancelled on the appointed day, then party seeking such cancellation/suspension shall inform/notify other party about it at least 24 hours before it with reason for doing so and in case such suspension or cancellation is at the behest of mother then such visitation right shall be substituted for any subsequent Saturday and Sunday. Any visitation, cancelled by non-custodial father, shall be forfeited, unless parties agree to substitute such visitation. For emergent reason surfacing within 24 hours before time of visitation right, condition of informing before 24 hours shall not apply. (xiii) Wife (mother of the child) is directed to handover the original Aadhar Card, date of birth certificate and other relevant documents like bank passbook etc. to father of the child on a date(s) fixed with consultation of concerned authority, enabling father to take necessary steps for correction of name of child by updating it in Aadhar Card, and also to hand over the custody of child to husband (father of child) on date fixed for it, duly communicated to the mother at least two days in advance, and if necessary on subsequent dates also, enabling the father to take necessary steps for reflecting full name of child in Aadhar Card as agreed and in terms of order passed by this Court. Original relevant documents and child shall be handed over by mother to the father and vice versa also in presence of Coordinator of Mediation Center or Para Legal Volunteer in District Courts Una, like earlier arrangement made at the time of handing over the child during exercise of visitation right. For such arrangement parties are directed to notify the date(s) to Coordinator of Mediation Center/Learned District Judge well in advance at least 2 days before. For such arrangement parties are directed to notify the date(s) to Coordinator of Mediation Center/Learned District Judge well in advance at least 2 days before. (xiv) Concerned competent authority/Incharge of Aadhar Sampark Kendra (UIDAI) is directed to carry out necessary correction in the name of child in Aadhar Card for reflecting it as ‘Yuvan Kalia alias Aadvik Sharma’, as agreed by the parents of child in settlement arrived at before the Court, which has also been accepted and ordered by the Court. In case of any difficulty, parties, i.e. father and mother, shall be at liberty to approach the Court again in this regard. (xv) As agreed, in terms of settlement, for dissolution of marriage of Rohit Kalia and Sangita Sharma, petition filed by the wife, bearing HMA No. 166 of 2017, pending in the Court of District Judge, Una, Himachal Pradesh, shall be considered a petition for dissolution of marriage with mutual consent and an appropriate decree is to be passed accordingly. Jurisdiction to pass such decree is with District Judge, Una. Therefore, record of HMA No. 166 of 2017 is ordered to be sent back to the said Court for passing appropriate decree on the basis of mutual consent for dissolution of marriage, on the date fixed for presence of parties before learned District Judge, Una, as the parties have already agreed for that. (xvi) Parties are directed to appear in the Court of learned District Judge, Una, either personally or through counsel, on 30th June, 2021, by putting physical or virtual appearance, as possible and permissible on account of Pandemic Covid-19, for passing final judgment and decree for dissolution of marriage on the basis of mutual consent. (xvii) Further, no fresh notice shall be issued by the learned District Judge for presence of parties on failure to appear by either party, but the petition shall be taken up and disposed of by the learned District Judge, by passing appropriate order and decree for dissolution of marriage on the basis of consent expressed by the parties before learned Mediator as well as in their statements recorded on oath, in the Court. Certified copies of statements as well as terms of settlement have already been produced by the wife before learned District Judge, which are lying in the record of HMA No. 166 of 2017. Certified copies of statements as well as terms of settlement have already been produced by the wife before learned District Judge, which are lying in the record of HMA No. 166 of 2017. (xviii) For violation of aforesaid directions, besides facing proceedings for Contempt of Court, party in default may also lose respective right over the custody or visitation right to the child, as the case may be. (xix). Remaining conditions of terms of settlement shall remain as already agreed. (xx) For any practical difficulty in complying with the aforesaid directions parties are at liberty to approach the Family Court/District Court, as the case may be. 29. Parties are also at liberty to approach the Family Court/District Court, as the case may be, to alter, vary or modify the aforesaid terms and conditions, mechanism and manner of exercise of visitation right for plausible reasons existing on date and in such eventuality without being influenced by the terms and conditions settled by this Court, Family Court/District Court shall exercise its jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue before it on its own merit under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 or any other law dealing with issue including visitation right but keeping in view the interest of the child at the foremost. The applications as well as Contempt Petition stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.