Court dismissed the petition due to the elapsed interim custody order, clarifying future rights remain unaffected.

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, without entering into the merits of the impugned order; but clarifying that nothing contained therein will foreclose any right available to the parties as per law in future.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/- M.B. SNEHALATHA JUDGE stu APPENDIX OF OP (FC) NO. 54 OF 2026 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OP NO. 1061 OF 2024 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE TIRUR FAMILY COURT DATED 4.10.2024.