- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 14165 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT. HAVEENA ATTAHALLY W/O ANOOP H.A. AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/A 93, FIRST FLOOR, 4TH A MAIN, 5TH CROSS, FURTHER EXTENSION OF MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 086 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.NEHRU, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. ANOOP H.A., S/O.H.K.APPAJIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.459, 1ST CROSS, 4TH MAIN, MARUTHI TEMPLE ROAD, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSURU -560 086 …RESPONDENT (BY MS.HARSHITHA A RATHOD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.PRANAV KUMAR MYSORE, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.04.2025, ON I.A NO.4, FURNISHED AT ANNEXURE- A, DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO HANDOVER THE CUSTODY OF HER MINOR DAUGHTERS BY NAME TASHVI ANOOP GOWDA AND SHANVI ANOOP GOWDA TO THE RESPONDENT ON 04.05.2025 AT 10.00 A.M. TILL 5.00 P.M. ON 31.05.2025, BY THE LEARNED V ADDL. Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, IN G AND WC NO.273/2024 AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER/S AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER BY CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner/mother aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in G&WC.No.273/2024 dated 17.04.2025 by the V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had directed the petitioner/mother to handover the custody of her minor daughters to the respondent/father on 04.05.2025 at 10:00 a.m. till 05:00 p.m. on 31.05.2025. 2. The parties are referred to as father and the mother for the sake of convenience. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/mother submits that the Family Court had failed to consider the holidays of the children. It is submitted that when the Family Court had interacted with the children, the children had stated - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 that they are not interested to meet the father, as the father had refused to come to the passport office to sign the papers, despite the request of the mother and daughter and shattered the dreams of the daughter going to United Stated for education tour. When the children had expressed their unwillingness to go with the father, the Court ought not to have passed this order. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/father submitted that this petition has become infructuous because the order is passed on 17.04.2025 and the order of the Court is between 04.05.2025 to 31.05.2025, nothing remains for consideration in this petition. 5. In response to that, learned counsel appearing for the mother submits that the matter came up during the Summer Vacation 2025 and the petition is filed on 29.04.2025 before this Court and there is no interim order passed by the Court and the respondent has already filed the contempt. It is submitted that the order impugned needs to be interfered by this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. When an order is passed by the Court, it has to be implemented. If any party is aggrieved by the order passed by the Court, they have to prefer appeal against the said order and they have to question that order. Unless and until the order of the Court is stayed/suspended by the Appellate Court, as long as the order is operating, it is the duty of the parties to comply with the order. Mere filing of a petition before the Court is not sufficient. When the order passed by the Court is dated 17.04.2025, when stay is not granted by this Court, it is the duty of the petitioner to comply with the order. When this court wanted to dismiss the writ petition as infructuous, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there has to be an order on the merits of the matter. As such, the Court is compelled to pass an order on the merits of it. 7. In all these custody matters, in majority of the cases, the children who are with the custodial parents, for one reason or the other would always come up saying that they are not interested to see the other parent. The reason for that is obvious and the reluctance from the children to meet the father - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 itself cannot be a ground not to grant visitation/custody to the father. In this case, the reason that is stated is that the father has not come forward to appear before the passport authority. Even otherwise also, whatever are the reasons, basing on what the child states at their age cannot be a ground for the Court to grant visitation or refuse to grant visitation. The Court considering the material on record had rightly passed an order and granted custody to the father. According to the learned counsel, vacation is till 27.05.2025. If that is the ground, the petitioner could have complied with the order and could have sought for a modification before this Court or before the Family Court stating that after 27.05.2025, that order cannot be complied for the reason that the children are having school. That ground is not available to the petitioner before 27.05.2025. From 04.05.2025 to 27.05.2025, the only ground now that is available to the petitioner is that the children are reluctant. That itself is not a ground and the Court had rightly passed the order and this Court do not find any reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following order: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28995 WP No. 14165 of 2025 ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50