Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court

Prioritizing The Child’s Well-Being Over Other Considerations In Custody Battles: Supreme Court Upholds Father’s Custody In Child Custody Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the custody of a child with the father, emphasizing the paramount importance of the child’s welfare in custody disputes. The decision in the case of Selvaraj vs. Revathi was delivered by Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal.

The apex court, in its judgment, highlighted, “In any matter of custody of a child, his welfare is paramount consideration.” This observation underscores the court’s approach in prioritizing the child’s well-being over other considerations in custody battles.

The custody dispute emerged after a matrimonial discord between Selvaraj and Revathi, leading to divorce proceedings. The child, born out of their wedlock, had been living with the father since birth. Despite a previous order directing the father to hand over custody to the mother, compliance was not met.

The court interacted directly with the child, who expressed a strong preference to stay with the father. The court noted, “From the very beginning, he is living with the father-appellant... It would not be in the interest for upbringing of the child that his custody is given to the respondent-mother at this stage.”

Senior Advocate Ms. V. Mohana was appointed to counsel and interact with the child and parents. Her efforts led to the child agreeing to monthly meetings and phone calls with the mother, fostering a gradual improvement in their relationship.

Maintaining the status quo, the Supreme Court ruled that the child’s custody would remain with the father, Selvaraj, while granting the mother, Revathi, rights to call and have monthly visits. The court’s decision is reflective of its consideration of the child’s preferences and psychological well-being.

Date of Decision: 6th December 2023

SELVARAJ VS REVATHI

Latest Legal News