JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner alleges that her 9 year old son is being detained by the 3^rd respondent – who, she admits, is her mother- in-law. She asserts that there are matrimonial disputes between her and her husband; and that taking advantage of this, the child is being detained by the 3^rd respondent; hence, that she has been constrained to approach this Court, particularly since she has not been given any information about him for the last few months.

2. After we issued notice to the respondents, the parties offered to appear before us and they did so on 24.11.2025, when, after interacting with them, we passed the following order:

The petitioner, the 3rd respondent and the child were before us today. We found the child to be equally comfortable with his mother and paternal grandmother - namely the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, respectively.

2. The parties concede that there are some issues between the petitioner and her husband and that she has obtained an order of shared residence against him.

3. The 3rd respondent told us that, in order to obtain some solution, she is willing to stay temporarily, till the next posting date, with her nephew, so that the peti