Shoba D/O Gunasekaran v A Rajandran: Child Custody Dispute
In Shoba D/O Gunasekaran v A Rajandran, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the Petitioner, Shoba D/O Gunasekaran, against the decision of the District Court granting interim custody, care, and control of the child to the Respondent, A Rajandran. The primary legal issue was the determination of the child's best interests in the context of interim custody arrangements. The High Court partially allowed the appeal, modifying the access arrangements for the Petitioner while maintaining interim custody with the Respondent.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal partially allowed; custody to Respondent, access to Petitioner varied.
1.3 Case Type
Family
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding interim custody of a child. The court granted interim custody, care, and control to the Respondent, with specific access arrangements for the Petitioner.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoba D/O Gunasekaran | Appellant, Petitioner | Individual | Appeal partially allowed | Partial | |
| A Rajandran | Respondent | Individual | Interim custody, care and control of the child granted | Won | |
| Ramanathan Theyvendran | Other | Individual |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lee Seiu Kin | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The Petitioner and Respondent were married on 17 March 1995.
- A son, Sanathraj Rajandran, was born on 14 May 1996.
- The parties encountered marital problems.
- The Petitioner collapsed and was hospitalised in March 2000.
- The Respondent took Sanathraj to live with his parents on 18 March 2000.
- The Petitioner filed a petition for divorce on 23 March 2000.
- The Petitioner filed an application for interim custody on 24 March 2000.
5. Formal Citations
- Shoba D/O Gunasekaran v A Rajandran and Another, D 807/2000, RAS 720094/2000, [2001] SGHC 138
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Marriage registered | |
| Parties lived with Petitioner's parents | |
| Child born | |
| Parties moved to their own flat | |
| Petitioner collapsed and was hospitalised | |
| Respondent took child to live with his parents | |
| Divorce petition filed | |
| Petitioner filed application for interim custody | |
| Hearing for interim custody application | |
| Welfare report submitted by MCD | |
| District Judge ordered interim custody to Respondent | |
| Court made orders regarding custody and access | |
| Petitioner filed Notice of Appeal | |
| Judgment Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Interim Custody
- Outcome: Interim custody granted to the Respondent with specific access arrangements for the Petitioner.
- Category: Substantive
- Child's Welfare
- Outcome: The court considered the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration in making the custody order.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Interim Custody
- Care and Control of Child
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Family Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No cited cases | |||||
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Section 125(2) of the Women’s Charter | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Interim Custody
- Access
- Child's Welfare
- Parental Care
- Custody Order
15.2 Keywords
- custody
- access
- child
- welfare
- Singapore
- family law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Child Custody | 95 |
| Family Law | 90 |
| Child Support | 60 |
| Divorce | 50 |
| Parenting | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Family Law
- Child Custody
- Divorce