Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
AMINA HUDA – Appellant
Versus
JIYAS P.K. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court acknowledges prior errors affecting child custody. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 2. agreement on interim custody arrangements between parties. (Para 6 , 7 , 10) |
| 3. contempt case closed; custody order modified. (Para 8 , 9 , 11) |
Devan Ramachandran,J.
We must begin conceding that, perhaps, this Court made a mistake while recording submissions and issuing directions in the judgment. Though this was inadvertent, we believe that it is enjoined on us to rectify it, lest the litigants be prejudiced.
2. We delivered judgment in OP(FC).No.194/2025, ordering the parties to continue the arrangement as we have earlier made in the interim order dated 11.04.2025. However, it was not pointed out to us by either of the Counsel that this order had been modified by a subsequent order dated 04.06.2025 - through which the child was allowed to be with the father. This is indubitable from the said order, where we directed the respondent herein to leave the child with the maternal grandparents on 07.06.2025, to be picked up on the same day at
4 P.M.
3. The afore lacuna, has now given rise to an unnecessary controversy, which obviously will traumatize the child.
4. The petitioner alleges that her
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
