1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. S. BOPANNA

WRIT PETITION NO.21986/2017 (GM – FC)

BETWEEN:

VISHMA M P
D/O. LATE. M S PONNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
# 42, SATHYAMURTHY ROAD,
R.S. PALYA, M.S. NAGAR POST,
BANGALORE 560033. .. PETITIONER

(By Sri PRABHUGOUD B TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M U PONNANNA
S/O. SRI. M UTHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 38 EYARS,
THAVALAGERI VILLAGE,
T. SHETTIGERI POST,
SRIMANGALA NAD,
VIRAJPET TALUK,
SOUTH COORG – 571218. .. RESPONDENT

(By Sri N RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER DTD:27.4.2017 PASSED ON IA NO.VIII PASSED
IN GWC NO.7/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC VIRAJPET, PRODUCED VIDE
2

ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IA NO.VIII
FILED THEREIN PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN `B’ GROUP’ THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order

dated 27.4.2017 passed on I.A.No.8 in G

WC.No.07/2016 pending on the file of the Senior Civil

Judge and JMFC as at Annexure-“A” to the petition.

2. The petitioner herein is the former wife of the

respondent. Due to certain disputes in their marital life,

they were residing separately and thereafter a petition

under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed

before the Court below. The marriage between the parties

was accordingly dissolved. Though the position is such,

since a child was also born during the subsistence of their

marriage, the respondent herein has filed a petition under

Sections 7 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act in G

WC.No.07/2016 seeking custody of the minor daughter.
3

In the said proceedings, the respondent herein also filed

an application in I.A.No.8 seeking interim custody of the

minor child Kum. Manya Muthamma during the summer

vacation between the period 15.4.2017 to 13.5.2017. The

Court below after considering the application has through

the impugned order held that the respondent herein is

entitled to interim custody of the minor child from

20.5.2017 to 29.5.2017. The petitioner herein claiming to

be aggrieved by the said order is before this Court in this

petition.

3. During pendency of this petition, attempts were

also made by the parties, including before the Mediation

Center to resolve the issue amicably. However, attempts

having failed, the instant petition is listed before this Court

for consideration.

4. In that background, I have heard the learned

counsel for the parties. Though contentions have been

urged in support as well as to assail the order passed by
4

the Court below, from the very nature of the prayer made

in I.A.No.8 and the relief granted while disposing of the

application, it is clear that the prayer as made in the

instant petition does not survive for consideration at this

juncture as the period for which interim custody was

sought and was granted by the Court below has elapsed.

Therefore, the appropriate course while disposing the

instant petition would be to direct the Court below to

dispose of the main proceedings in G WC.No.7/2016

within a time frame so that based on the evidence

tendered by the parties the right could be determined

while disposing of the main petition itself. In the

meanwhile, if for any reason any interim visitation is to be

considered on specific terms for any other period, that is

also a matter which could be taken note of by the Court

below as those are aspects which is beyond the scope of

this petition as the petition has rendered itself

infructuous. In view of the impugned order dated

27.4.2017 having lost its efficacy and the same not being
5

available for implementation at this stage, there is no need

to set aside the same. However, since the said order is not

implementable at this stage, it is directed that the Court

below shall take up the petition in G WC No.7/2016 for

disposal on its merits and dispose of the same as

expeditiously as possible, but not later than six months’

from the date on which the copy of this Court is furnished

to the Court below. Needless to mention, if any interim

considerations are to be made by the Court below,

discretion in that regard is left open to the Court below.

5. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*alb/-.