Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 S.Karthick ...Petitioner Vs. S.Vijayalakshmi ...Respondent Prayer : Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent for disobeying the order of A.No.131 of 2025 in GWOP.No.669 of 2024 passed by this Court dated 19.03.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.V.V.Sairam For Respondent : Mrs.Viajaylakshmi Mr.K.Rajarathnam ORDER This Contempt Petition had been filed alleging violation of orders of this Court dated 19.03.2025. Originally by order dated 20.02.2025 this Court had granted visitation rights on the first and third Saturday of every month between 10.00 am to 12.00 pm. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The matter was again taken up for hearing on the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner indicating that the child is only brought at 11.30 a.m., and that the respondent had been interfering in the visitation. To resolve the issue, this Court had directed the respondent, who is the grandmother of the child to bring the child at 10.00 a.m., to the Child Care Center attached to the Family Court and leave the child with the applicant father and collect the child at 12.00 p.m. 3. It is to be noted that by order dated 31.07.2025, the said order was modified directing the respondent who is the maternal grandmother to bring the child during hearing before the learned Master for which dates have been fixed and permit the applicant father to be with the child for one hour on each day without any interruption. It is informed that such visitation had been complied with and during the last of the hearing the learned Master had referred the matter back to the Court in view of certain issues that has been raised in leading the evidence. 4. Hence, it was reported by the learned counsel for the respondent that in view of the order of modification, the earlier order got merged and therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to complain of violation of the order that was made prior to the order of modification. However, the learned counsel for the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 petitioner would submit that he had not been permitted to see the child as per Court specific order after the matter was referred back to the Court. 5. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent the order, violation of which is complained of, stood modified by this Court in its order dated 31.07.2025. It is unfortunate that the evidence on the fixed dates could not be completed in view of issues that had been raised before the learned Master who had recorded the evidence. Therefore, this Court is of the view that no action can be taken for violation of the orders which had been modified. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Contempt Petition is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move the Court for modification of the order dated 31.07.2025. 27-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No dna https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 K.KUMARESH BABU, J. dna Cont.P.No.2072 of 2025 27-03-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis