Table of Content
1. violation of court orders regarding visitation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. argument regarding allegations and responses. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's directive to facilitate visitation. (Para 6 , 7)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Cont.P.No.2514 of 2025 Dr.Sabarinath Radhakrishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

Meenakshi Sougoumar ... Respondent PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent herein for her wilful disobedience of the order dated 06.12.2024 in C.R.P.No.2352 of 2024. For Petitioner : Ms.R.Varalakshmi For Respondent : Mr.D.Jayasekar ORDER Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listings on 26.09.2025 and 17.10.2025, which read as follows:

Proceedings dated 26.09.2025:

The petitioner had filed C.R.P.No.2352 of 2024, challenging the cancellation of visitation rights of the petitioner to visit his daughter on every 1^st and 3^rd Saturday of a month in the Family Court itself. This Court, by the order dated 06.12.2024, considered the submissions of the petitioner and the respondent and passed the following order.

Paragraph No.11 of the order reads as follows:

“11. In view of the above, this Revision is allowed and the order dated 18.05.2023 passed in I.A.No.1334 of 2022 in G.O.P.No.22 of 2019, on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry, is set aside and the visitation right granted to the petitioner in 1.A.No.702 of 2019, should be maintained as per the order, dated 30.09.2021. However, liberty is given to the parties to seek further orders, as may be required from time to time, from the Family Court, Pondicherry. The Family Court, to refer the matter for Mediation to resolve the issue between the father and mother of the child, considering the child's welfare and futures as paramount, even if any earlier such exercise got stalled. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.”

2.Thus it is clear that the respondent to bring the child to the Family Court, Puducherry on the 1^st and 3^rd Saturday of every month. The petitioner, admittedly, is residing and employed in United Kingdom. For the purpose of meeting his daughter, he travelled from United Kingdom and on following dates he is present before the Family Court, Puducherry:

S.No.	Arrival	Departure	Duration of Stay
1	18.11.2024	25.12.2024	1 Month – 7 days
2	29.01.2025	05.02.2025	7 days
3	13.02.2025	18.02.2025	5 days
4	27.02.2025	04.03.2025	7 days
5	12.03.2025	18.03.2025	5 days
6	29.03.2025	05.05.2025	1 Month and 1 Week
7	17.05.2025	26.05.2025	10 days
8	05.06.2025	10.06.2025	5 days
9	19.06.2025	22.06.2025	4 days

But the respondent not bothered and violated the Court’s order, hence committed contempt.

3.In support of his contention, the petitioner had also produced the adjudication from 06.10.2021 to 21.06.2025 to show that the respondent either failed to appear or did not bring the daughter or not allowing the petitioner to have a touch or any interaction with her. The purpose of visitation right is to have a touch and feel of the father with the daughter and the daughter to have love and affection of both the parents, which has been deliberately circumvented and denied by the adamant attitude of the respondent, which is in clear violation of the orders of this Court. Hence, contempt has been committed. He further submitted that prior to filing this contempt petition, the petitioner had sent a pre-contempt notice and the same was received on 21.06.2025 but there is no reply or denial.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent fairly submitted that the respondent received the pre- contempt notice but not replied. He totally denies the allegations of not appearing before the Family Court and not allowing the petitioner to have interaction with his child. It is the child, who is in fearsome of petitioner, had been clinching with the respondent/mother

Click Here to Read the rest of this document