Finalized judicial orders granting relative visitation must be performed without evasion. The court holds supervisory authority to enforce compliance while exercising discretion to adjust scheduling for a minor's academic necessities to ensure the welfare of the child is balanced against the rights decreed.

JUDGMENT :

TEJAS KARIA, J.

1. Exemptions are allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Applications stand disposed of.

3. The present Petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 assailing the order dated 09.06.2026 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-02, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (“Family Court”) in Misc. DJ No. 241/2026 (“Application”) arising out of Guardianship Petition being GP No. 198/2016 titled as ‘Rajinder Kr. Jindal v. Reetika’ (“GP”).

4. The Respondents are the paternal grandparents of the 17 years old minor child and had instituted GP seeking custody and guardianship of the minor child, who has since infancy remained in the care, custody and guardianship of her biological mother, the Petitioner.

5. Vide judgment dated 27.09.2025 passed in GP, the learned Family Court granted the Respondents to a single, carefully supervised meeting with the minor child, along with a direction to deposit Rs. 52 lakhs which admittedly belonged to the minor child.

6. The Petitioner preferred an Appeal challenging the Judgment dated 27.09.2025 passed in GP before this Court being MAT APP. (F.C.) 394/2025 (“MAT Appeal”). The Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 07.11.2025, dismissed the MAT Appeal and upheld the judgment dated 27.09.2025 passed in GP by the learned Family Court.

7. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 07.11.2025 passed in MAT Appeal, the Petitioner filed Special Leave Petition (“SLP”) before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court vide order dated 08.01.2026 directed the Parties to maintain status quo with regard to the visitation rights, however vide order dated 21.05.2026, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP and upheld the judgement dated 07.11.22025 passed in MAT Appeal, while observing that the Petitioner had been delaying the visitation rights granted to the Respondents on some pretext or the and the child will be attaining the age of 18 years in August, 2026. Accordingly, interim order granted on 08.01.2026 was vacated and the Parties were directed to comply with the judgement passed in MAT Appeal forthwith.

8. Pursuant to the order dated 21.05.2026 passed in the SLP by the Supreme Court, Respondents filed the Application before the learned Family Court on 25.05.2026 for fixing a date for visitation with the minor child in terms of judgement dated 27.09.2025 in GP passed by the learned Family Court.

9. On 09.06.2026, the Petitioner submitted before the learned Family Court that the minor child was engaged in the process of college admissions and preparation during the month of June 2026, and accordingly sought time to file a reply to the Application preferred by the Respondents. However, the learned Family Court, vide the Impugned Order, directed that the minor child be produced on 17.06.2026.

10. Aggrieved by the Impugned Order, the Petitioner has preferred the present Petition.

11. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the minor child is presently occupied with the college admission process and is also preparing for her entrance examinations.

12. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that there is nothing on record to indicate that the minor child is scheduled to appear in any entrance examination or is pursuing any college admission during the month of June 2026.

13. Upon consideration of the submissions advanced by the Parties and having regard to the judgment by the Division Bench of this Court in the MAT Appeal and the subsequent dismissal of the SLP by the Supreme Court, no case has been made out by the Petitioner to avoid compliance w