IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 17335 OF 2025 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

RAJ KUMARESAN L., S/O. LATE LAKSHMIKANTH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O NO-59/B, 1^ST FLOOR, 5^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, ANANDANAGAR, R.T. NAGARA, BENGALURU-560 032, ALSO R/O NO. 171, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN

14^TH MAIN, IAS COLONY, BTM LAYOUT, Location:

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 076.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. HALLI SHANTAPPA BASAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. SARALA DEVI, D/O. LATE SUBRAMANI.S, AGED ABOUT 46 YAERS, R/O.NO.59/8, 1^ST FLOOR, 5^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, ANANDANAGAR, R.T. NAGARA, BENGALURU-560 032.

PRESENTLY R/O SMR CASTLE, NO-307, 2^ND FLOOR, BANASAWADI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 043.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TUMBIGI PRABHUGOUDA BASAVANTARAYAGOUDA, ADVOCATE;

RESPONDENT-SERVED)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU IN EX PET. NO 157/2024 DATED 24/2/2025, PRODUCED AS ANNEXEURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

Aggrieved by the order passed in Ex.P.No.157/2024 dated

24.02.2025 by the IV Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the delivery warrant is issued against the JDr./father to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of property referred in condition No.7 of mediation settlement agreement dated 19.02.2024, the JDr./father is before this Court.

2. The parties are referred to as father and mother for the sake of convenience.

3. The parties have entered into settlement before the Mediation Centre in M.C.No.1104/2021. As per the said settlement, the mother has agreed to bear entire educational, medical, upbringing and any other incidental expenses of the minor son and they have agreed that they have no claims of maintenance/permanent alimony against each other either past, present or in future, as both of them are gainfully employed. The mother had agreed to return back gold mangalya chain and one gold finger ring to the father on or before 14.03.2024. The father has agreed to vacate and handover the vacant premises bearing No.59/B, 1^st Floor, 5^th Cross, Anandanagar, R.T. Nagar, Bengaluru-560 032, to the mother on or before reporting settlement before the Family Court. In the light of the settlement, the mother had agreed to withdraw the cases filed by her i.e., Crl.Misc.No.64/2023, Crl.Misc.166/2022 and G&WC.No.429/2023 and basing on the same, the marriage between the parties was dissolved. The mother had filed the execution petition as clause No.7 with regard to handing over of the vacant premises was not complied by the father.

4. By the order impugned, the Family Court had issued the delivery warrant against the father. It is the contention of the JDr./father before the Family Court that the DHr./mother had not complied the other condition with regard to withdrawal of other cases pending between the parties. It is stated by the DHr./mother that the other cases were not withdrawn as JDr./father had not complied the condition of handing over the vacant possession. The Family Court had further observed that on the last hearing date when the child was kept present before the Court he declined to go with his mother and also stated that he want both his parents in the same house. It is submitted on behalf of JDr./father that the child stays in the same house and if delivery warrant is issued then the child has to be sent out of the house. As of now it is the father, who is residing in the house described in condition No.7 of the mediation settlement agreement and he had agreed to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the house. So if the child is not willing to go along with the DHr./mother and as he prefers to be with the father on vacating the premises it is for the JDr./mother to take the chil