LexEBY CHERIAN versus JEREMA JOHN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 6 S.C.R. 202 : 2025 INSC 709 Eby Cherian v. Jerema John (Civil Appeal No. 6924 of 2025) 15 May 2025 [Vikram Nath* and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the interim custody arrangement made by the family court. Headnotes† Family law – Custody of child – Interim-custody arrangement by the family court – Challenge to – Marital discord between respondent-wife and the appellant-husband – Respondent left the matrimonial home, and since then the child exclusively in her care – Appellant employed on rotational overseas assignments, filed petition seeking permanent custody of the child, and during pendency sought interim visitation – Family Court held that as and when the petitioner is available here, he may move necessary application for getting overnight custody – Thereafter appellant, was required to file a separate interlocutory application on every visit to India – Appellant sought single definitive interim schedule – High Court declined to set aside an interim- custody arrangement made by the Family Court, and directed the appellant to continue moving a fresh application each time he visited India for overnight access to his minor daughter – Justification: Held: Arrangement devised by family court, requiring the appellant to file a fresh IA on every visit to India, places an undue procedural burden on both the father and, by necessary implication, the minor child – Custody litigation at family court generally proceeds at a measured pace and compelling repetitive applications for the same * Author [2025] 6 S.C.R. 203 Eby Cherian v. Jerema John relief reduces the child’s time, exhausts the father’s limited leave, and invites avoidable conflict at every turn – Meaningful contact with both parents is an integral component for the child’s welfare – Where a non-custodial parent demonstrates consistency to be with the child, pays maintenance, and arranges his professional life around the child’s calendar, as the appellant has done, procedure ought not to stand in the way of a predictable schedule – Child cannot be left to the vagaries of piecemeal orders – Structured timetable, sensitive to her routine and the appellant’s overseas posting, is thus imperative – It is just and equitable to replace the family court’s arrangement with a standing interim arrangement that balances stability with the appellant’s right to regular contact – Impugned order set aside – Directions issued governing interim access until final disposal of the petition or until further orders of family court. [Paras 15-20] List of Keywords Permanent custody of child; Interim-custom arrangement; Definitive interim arrangement; “Apply-each-time” arrangement; Daily video interaction; Separate interlocutory application; Overnight custody; Meaningful contact with both parents; Custody litigation; Child’s welfare; Vagaries of piecemeal orders; Structured timetable; Marital discord; Rotational overseas assignments; Interim visitation; Single definitive interim schedule regarding custody. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6924 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 23.08.2024 of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in OPFC No. 364 of 2024 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Petitioner: Ms. Shashi Kiran, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Dr. Satish Chandra, Ms. Sangeeta Bhalla, Ms. Ashna Singh, Ms. Anju Sen. Advs. for the Respondent: Abhinay, Ms. Sumati Jund, Ms. Kirti Vyas 204 [2025] 6 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Vikram Nath, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeal assails the judgment dated 23 August 2024 of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in O.P. (FC) No. 364 of 2024. By the impugned order the High Court declined to set aside an interim-custody arrangement made by the Family Court, Ernakulam on 21 September 2023 in O.P. No. 1085 of 2023, and directed the appellant–father to continue moving a fresh application each time he visited India for overnight access to his minor daughter. 3. The essential background may be stated briefly. The parties were married on 10 January 2016. The appellant is a graduate engineer who has spent most of his career on rotational overseas assignments, initially in Angola and, since 27 August 2024, in the United Arab Emirates, returning to India during scheduled breaks. The respondent- moth
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.