child custody order is to be executable but not by IA in the light of the specific direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to hand over the minor child to the petitioner on attaining age of 5 years, this Court is of the opinion 4 that the petitioner is entitled for the custody of the minor child by name Pirati Dhanush. However, the petitioner has to follow the procedure provided under Section 18 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for seeking custody of child. 11) Section 18 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 is extracted hereunder: 18. Execution of decrees and orders.- (1) A decree or an order [other than an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil court and shall be executed in the same manner as is prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the execution of decrees and orders. -(1) A decree or an order [other than an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil court and shall be executed in the same manner as is prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the execution of decrees and orders." (2) An order passed by a Family Court under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 5 1974) shall be executed in the manner prescribed for the execution of such order by that Code. (3) A decree or order may be executed either by the Family Court which passed it or by the other Family Court or ordinary civil court to which it is sent for execution. 12) In the light of the above provision of law, the petitioner has to file an application for execution of the order, dated 03.11.2017 before the Court below as per the procedure provided under law and the present application filed by the petitioner is not maintainable.

child custody order is to be executable but not by IA

 in the light of the specific direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to hand over the minor child to the petitioner on attaining age of 5 years, this Court is of the opinion 4 that the petitioner is entitled for the custody of the minor child by name Pirati Dhanush. However, the petitioner has to follow the procedure provided under Section 18 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for seeking custody of child. 11) Section 18 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 is extracted hereunder: 18. Execution of decrees and orders.- (1) A decree or an order [other than an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil court and shall be executed in the same manner as is prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the execution of decrees and orders. -(1) A decree or an order [other than an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil court and shall be executed in the same manner as is prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the execution of decrees and orders." (2) An order passed by a Family Court under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 5 1974) shall be executed in the manner prescribed for the execution of such order by that Code. (3) A decree or order may be executed either by the Family Court which passed it or by the other Family Court or ordinary civil court to which it is sent for execution. 12) In the light of the above provision of law, the petitioner has to file an application for execution of the order, dated 03.11.2017 before the Court below as per the procedure provided under law and the present application filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. 

AP HIGH COURT

 1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 979 of 2020

Pirati Venkata Siva Vamsi Krishna,
Versus

Vanjarapu Appala Naidu

O R D E R:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed praying to direct the XIV

Additional District Judge-cum-Addl. Family Court, Vijayawada,

Krishna District to dispose of the I.A.No.95 of 2020 in

GWOP.No.578 of 2016 as expeditiously.

2) The petitioner filed GWOP No.578 of 2016 on the file of

the XIV Additional District Judge-cum-Addl. Family Court,

Vijayawada, Krishna District to declare and appoint the

petitioner as guardian for minor child by name Pirati Dhanush

directing the respondents 1 to 4 to give the said minor child to

the care and custody of the petitioner. Respondents 1 and 2

filed counter.

3) After hearing both counsel and upon appreciation of the

evidence available on record, the Court below partly allowed the

petition by its order, dated 03.11.2017 by declaring that the

petitioner is guardian of the minor child by name Pirati

Dhanush and directed the respondents 1 and 2 to hand over the

minor child to the petitioner on attaining the age of 5 years.

4) Seeking compliance of the order, dated 03.11.2017, the

petitioner filed I.A.No.95 of 2020 on 28.01.2020 before the Court

below seeking to appoint bailiff to hand over his minor son to 

 2

him with the help of amen/police aid from the custody of the

respondent Nos.1 and 2 since his child attained the age of 5

years on 19.01.2020. Aggrieved by the inaction of the Court

below in disposing the said application, present Civil Revision

Petition is filed.

5) Heard Sri B.V. Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri V.V. Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the

respondents.

6) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the

order, dated 03.11.2017, the petitioner is entitled to take the

custody of the boy Pirati Dhanush as he attained age of 5 years.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that though the petitioner

filed I.A.No.95 of 2020 in the month of January, 2020, the Court

below simply adjourning the matter for counter of the

respondents. In fact, according to the learned counsel for the

petitioner, no counter is required as the respondents have to

hand over the custody of the body to the petitioner as per the

order, dated 03.11.2017 in G.W.O.P.No.578 of 2016. Learned

counsel further contended that as the Government has proposed

to reopen the schools in the first week of September, 2020 and

the petitioner intends to join his son into the school, he seeking

an early disposal of the I.A.No.95 of 2020. 

 3

7) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents

submits that the interlocutory application filed by the petitioner

is not maintainable and the petitioner has to file execution

proceedings and sought custody of the child.

8) Having heard the submissions of both counsel and on

perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the

Court below by its order, dated 03.11.2017 in G.W.O.P.No.578

of 2016 passed very reasoned order declaring the petitioner as

guardian of the minor child. The Court below also directed the

respondent Nos.1 and 2 to hand over the minor child by name

Pirati Dhanush to the petitioner on attaining the age of 5 years.

9) Admittedly, as per the birth certificate issued by the

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation which was filed as

material paper in the Civil Revision Petition, the date of birth of

the son of the petitioner by name Pirati Dhanush is 19.01.2015.

As such, as on the date of filing of the I.A.No.95 of 2020 i.e., on

28.01.2020, it is clearly established that the boy attained age of

5 years.

10) In the light of the categorical declaration made by the

Court below that the petitioner is guardian of the minor child by

name Pirati Dhanush and in the light of the specific direction to

the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to hand over the minor child to the

petitioner on attaining age of 5 years, this Court is of the opinion 

 4

that the petitioner is entitled for the custody of the minor child

by name Pirati Dhanush. However, the petitioner has to follow

the procedure provided under Section 18 of the Family Courts

Act, 1984 for seeking custody of child.

11) Section 18 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 is extracted

hereunder:

18. Execution of decrees and orders.-

(1) A decree or an order [other than an order under

Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the

same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil

court and shall be executed in the same manner as is

prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of

1908) for the execution of decrees and orders. -(1) A

decree or an order [other than an order under

Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(2 of 1974)], passed by a Family Court shall have the

same force and effect as a decree or order of a civil

court and shall be executed in the same manner as is

prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of

1908) for the execution of decrees and orders."

(2) An order passed by a Family Court under Chapter

IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 

 5

1974) shall be executed in the manner prescribed for

the execution of such order by that Code.

(3) A decree or order may be executed either by the

Family Court which passed it or by the other Family

Court or ordinary civil court to which it is sent for

execution.

12) In the light of the above provision of law, the petitioner has

to file an application for execution of the order, dated

03.11.2017 before the Court below as per the procedure

provided under law and the present application filed by the

petitioner is not maintainable.

13) Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.

14) There is no order as to costs.

 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this

petition shall stand closed.

______________________

JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

Dt. 07.12.2020

PGR