19. In the case at hand, the order dated 01.10.2020 passed by the Principal Family Judge is upon an application filed under Section 12 of the Act, 1890 whereby visitation rights have been granted to the opposite party no.2. The aforesaid order is clearly of an interlocutory nature and has been granted to the opposite party no.2 who is the non­custodial parent to enable him to meet the child without removing him from the custody of the appellant herein who is the other parent.

20. The aforementioned order has been granted in proceedings under Section 25 of the Act, 1890, registered as Case No.619 of 2020, which is still pending. The observations recorded by the Family Judge in the order dated 01.10.2020 while granting visitation rights can at best be considered to be tentative in nature only for the purpose of deciding the application under Section 12 of the Act, 1890 and for passing of an order granting visitation rights which by its very nature is an interlocutory order.

21. In view of the aforesaid and considering the legal position as aforestated, we are of the considered view that the present appeal filed under Section 19 of the Act, 1984 is not maintainable.