The court may rectify its judgments to prevent child trauma when inadvertent mistakes create disputes over custody arrangements.

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 parents are ordered by this Court to be in custody of the child; while the respondent takes a stand to the contrary.

5. As we have said above, perhaps the parties cannot be fully blamed because the judgment we delivered referred to the interim order dated 11.04.2025 and not 04.06.2025.

6. Be that as it may, today Sri.B.Krishna Mani – learned Counsel for the respondent, submitted that his client is willing to hand over the child in interim custody to the maternal grandparents at 10 A.M every Saturday, till 6 P.M the ensuing Sunday.

7. Sri.O.V.Maniprasad – appearing for the petitioner, whose parents were also present in Court today, acceded to the afore suggestion.

8. It is thus obvious that we cannot exercise jurisdiction in this Contempt Case since, one cannot blame the respondent in any manner.

9. In the afore circumstances, we close this Contempt Case; however, directing, with the express consent of the learned Counsel on both sides – who are also present in person - that the respondent will deliver the child to the parents of the petitioner at 11 A.M every Saturday henceforth until 6 P.M on the ensuing Sundays. This shall be done by delivering the child to the residence of the petitioner, to be taken back from the same place on Sundays.

10. After we dictated the part of this judgment Sri.O.V.Maniprasad requested that, at least for this week, the child be allowed to go with the parents of his client today, until 5 P.M on 23.11.2025. We record with deep appreciation that Sri.B.Krishna Mani agreed to this.

11. Consequently, as an exception and for this week alone, the child will be with the grandparents from this Court, until 5 P.M on 23.11.2025, when the father can pick him up from the residence of the petitioner. For all other weekends, our afore directions will implicitly apply.

This Contempt Case is thus closed.