- (1.) This is a case with reference to the cus tody of the child for which this Court passed the order on 24th January, 2001 which is quoted hereunder: "Heard learned counsel for the parties. The question is about the custody of the child, a boy at present of about 10 years old, who, at present, is in the custody of the mother. We at this juncture would not like to dispose of the matter finally but give a chance for a congenial atmos phere, if possible for the child returning to the father in terms of the decree passed. To start with we consider, after hearing counsel for the parties, that both the parents should meet at a common place for lunch along with the child for at least two hours for the next eight weeks on every Sunday at 1 P. M. at India habitat Centre. During that period and during this interregnum till this Court takes up the matter, if a situation is created and the child agrees, the mother should have no objection that the child may go for sometime with the father also. However, we want to make it clear that no force should be applied for the said purpose. Even the period of two hours which we have fixed as a minimum period but if both the parties want to stay longer then this Court's order will not come in its way. List the matter after eight weeks. "
(2.) We made an attempt in view of the said order to find the mind of the child, whether he desires to go with the father instead of remaining with the mother. It was revealed that the child is not agreeable to leave the custody of the mother, hence we desired through our order dated 28th March, 2001, to produce the child before us for knowing the mind of the child. The child was produced on the 10th April, 2001 in the Chambers and we talked to the child for some time. After talking to the child, we found that the child was very alive of the unfortunate situation between his father and mother but was not ready to leave the home of his mother to go with father. He had many things to tell which we need not record in our order. After talking to the child our clear feeling is, it would not be proper to give any direction that the child should go in the custody of his father. In order to decide the custody of the child of 10 years his natural desire and his future development is very important to be kept in mind. We felt strongly, this is not the time for giving such direction, so we placed the matter today.
(3.) Today, we heard the matter and communicated our feelings which we gathered from the child. In view of this, we feel, it would be appropriate in the interest of the child and keeping in view the issues involved, to pass the following order.;