Devan Ramachandran , J.

Smt.Sreelakshmi Sabu - learned counsel for the petitioner, concedes that, by efflux of time, this Original Petition may have become infructuous because the impugned order, namely Ext.P5, granted custody of the child to the respondent from 10 a.m. on 29.12.2025 till 5 p.m. on 01.01.2026. She, however, complained that the learned Family Court was not right in recording that no objections had been raised by her client in granting such interim custody; and consequently prayed that this Court may, therefore, clarify the position.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent –

Sri.K.B.Arunkumar, however, submitted that the afore submissions are untrue and what the learned Family Court has recorded is factually correct.

3. We do not propose to, nor can we, enter into the merits of the rival contentions of the parties because, it is hinged on disputations of facts.

4. The only thing definite to us is that the time frame in the impugned interim order has now elapsed. The parties will have to invoke appropriate remedies, if they require, based on the same, or in support of the same, as they may be advised.

In the afore circumstances, this Original Petition is dismissed, witho