- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30369 WP No. 23502 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 23502 OF 2022 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: BASAVARAJAPPA S/O LATE CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O JAMMAPURA VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK -577 213, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HALLI SHANTAPPA BASAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. PAVITRA W/O BASAVARAJAPPA, D/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O HARONAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK- 577 213, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …RESPONDENT (V/O/D: 23/07/2025 - SERVICE OF NOTICE DEEMED IN R/O RESPONDENT) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHANNAGIRI IN M.C.NO.2/2021 ON I.A.NO.2 DATED: 07.11.2022 AT ANNEXURE-E. 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 Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30369 WP No. 23502 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.II in M.C.No.2/2021 dated 07.11.2022 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Channagiri, whereby the trial Court had permitted the mother to visit her daughter once in two weeks at lunch hours in the school premises till disposal of the petition and the headmaster of the school was directed to permit the mother to visit the daughter. 2. The parties are referred to as father and the mother for the sake of convenience. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the father submits that the daughter is staying along with the father and the mother had not filed any petition seeking custody of the child and she has not initiated any proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. It is submitted that in the M.C., she cannot file an application to see the child in the school. It is submitted that when the child is not comfortable with the mother and she is residing with the father, the trial Court ought not to have passed such an order. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30369 WP No. 23502 of 2022 4. This Court has perused the order passed by the trial Court. The Court while granting the visitation had observed that the husband disputed that if the mother visits the child, it would have an adverse impact upon the daughter. The Court had observed that it is needless to observe that every child is having right to have motherly love and at any cost that natural motherly love and affection cannot be taken away by anybody on any grounds. Therefore, the Court had granted visitation rights to the mother, keeping in mind the welfare and development of the daughter in all aspects and the mother had made out sufficient grounds to consider the application in her favour. 5. This Court by order dated 23.07.2025 had held that notice to the respondent amounts to deemed service of notice. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ father, perused the entire material on record. According to the learned counsel for the father, as the daughter is with him, the mother cannot meet the daughter in his absence and that is not in the welfare of the daughter and such an application filed in M.C. is not maintainable. The mother is seeking visitation rights of the child and she can file an application under the Guardians - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30369 WP No. 23502 of 2022 and Wards Act and not in the pending M.C. filed by the father. This Court is not able to appreciate any of the contentions that are raised on behalf of the father. The trial Court had granted supervised visitation in the school premises. It cannot be said that the child meeting the mother in the school would have an adverse impact on the life of the child. The trial Court had rightly observed that the necessity of a motherly love to the daughter. The submission of the learned counsel for the father that no application can be filed in the M.C. seeking visitation rights also has no legs to stand. Under the circumstances, trial Court had rightly considered the application and granted the visitation to the mother and this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Court. 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.: 39