Dismissed

Sriram Ramachandran v. Sangeetha Sriram

Karnataka HC12 Oct 2023CCC/325/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court examined a Civil Contempt Petition filed against a mother doctor accused of not complying with High Court visitation orders. Finding her explanations for non-compliance to be bona fide and receiving a positive response regarding visitation modification, the Court dismissed the contempt petition and modified rights.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed. Visitation rights modified: Saturdays from 12:30 PM to 7:00 PM. Dussehra vacation visitation granted for 4 days (Oct 14-17).

Sriram Ramachandran Vs Sangeetha Sriram — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶9

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 325 OF 2023 C/W

¶10

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3481 OF 2020

¶11

IN CCC No.325/2023:

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN, S/O G. RAMACHANDRAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT A 407, MAURISHKA PALACE, KADRI KAMBLA ROAD, MANGALORE-575 003.

¶14

…COMPLAINANT (BY MR.SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN.,PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶15

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B

¶16

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

AND:

¶18

SANGEETHA SRIRAM, W/O MR. SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1103, MARIAN PROMENADE APARTMENTS, KADRI KAMBLA ROAD, KADRI, MANGALORE-575 004.

¶19

…ACCUSED

¶20

(BY MS.LEKHA G D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GOVINDRAYA KAMATH K.,ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 10 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO PASS NECESSARY ORDER TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 10 AND 12 OF THE

¶22

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶23

CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDERS DATED 27.01.2023, PASSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN MFA NO.3481/2020 WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A.

¶24

IN MFA No.3481/2020:

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

MR. SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN, S/O G. RAMACHANDRAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT B 508, ST.JOHNS WOODS APARTMENT, NEAR TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 029.

¶27

…APPELLANT

¶28

(BY MR.SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN.,PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶29

AND:

¶30

MRS. SANGEETHA SRIRAM, W/O MR. SRIRAM RAMACHANDRAN, C/O JAI KUMAR JEGANATHAN, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT 6A, KAMBLA HEIGHTS, KADRI KAMBLA ROAD, KADRI, MANGALURU- 575 004.

¶31

…RESPONDENT

¶32

(BY MS.LEKHA G D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K G KAMATH.,ADVOCATE)

¶33

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47(A) OF GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, 1890 R/W UNDER SECTION 19 OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17.02.2020, PASSED IN G AND W.C. No.8/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K., MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC 7 AND 8 OF THE GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT OF 1980.

¶34

THIS CCC AND THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The complainant party-in-person is present in this court personally. Respondent is represented by Counsel.

¶38

Vide order dated 10.10.2023 it was observed by us that we had long and meaningful interaction with the parties and the minor children. Then there is a reference made to the submission of complainant on the response of the respondent-accused. The counsel representing the respondent-accused submits that though the reply to the complaint of contempt was ready yesterday itself it could not be filed in the office and the same is filed in the Court today, after serving copy of the complainant. Suffice it say, non-compliance of the order of this court seems to be for the reason reflected in para 12. The respondentaccused is a doctor and specialist Ophthalmology surgeon and she has been on hospital duty till 5.00 p.m. from Monday to Saturdays and even on Sunday she will be oncall duty for emergency cases. This factual aspect was also shared by the respondent-accused in the interaction

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶41

done in the chamber hearing on 10.10.2023. Thus it can safely be stated that non-compliance of some occassions was due to bona fide reasons and the same was not intentional.

¶42

It seems that the respondent-accused is approaching this court with a positive response which needs to be appreciated. We may refer to para 13 of the

¶43

reply affidavit and the same reads as under:

¶44

“13. The respondent respectfully submits that Respondent has no objections for Complainant spending quality time with the children and creating a loving and happy environment for the children. The Respectfully humbly request this Hon’ble Court to modify the visitation rights of the Complainant so as to enable the Complainant to spend quality time with the children, which can help the children to develop a bond between the Complainant and the children. The Respondent has no objections in children spending the Saturday afternoon and evening with the Complainant after their school hours i.e., form 12:30 pm till 7 pm. The Complainant, at all times, is free to take the children and safely bring them back, as per the directions of this Hon’ble Court, the Respondent has no intent to come in the way of children bonding with their father or spending quality time with him.”

¶45

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶46

The respondent-accused is justified in giving a positive response in para 13 of the reply by submitting that she has no objection for modification of the visitation rights of the complainant so as to enable him to spend quality time with children which can help in developing a bond between them. It is further submitted that the respondent has no objection for the children spending time Saturday afternoon and evening, with the complainant from 12.30 pm till 7.00 pm., after the school hours and further that the complainant at all times is fee to take the children and safely bring them back as per the directions of this court and the respondent has no intent to come in the way of children bonding with their father or spending quality time with him.

¶47

Accepting the above submissions, we are of the opinion that the respondent-accused has not committed any act of willful disobedience of the order of this court. Accordingly accepting the suggestion of the complainant for modification of the visitation rights, we direct the

¶48

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶49

respondent-accused to permit the complainant to have the visitation rights on every Saturday from 12.30 pm to 7.00 pm; complainant can take the children along with him from the house of respondent-accused and shall leave them back safely hours to the house of the respondentaccused after the visitation.

¶50

It was submitted in the interaction that the children will have Dussehra vacation and some arrangement is made by this court for visitation rights during the said so that the parties need not come to court separately. The complainant submits that he be given an opportunity to spend quality time with the children in the ensuing Dussehra vacation as he will also be having such a vacation and that will help him create the bond between himself and the children. This is a reasonable request and just too.

¶51

Accordingly, we permit the complainant to have visitation rights with the children for four days i.e., from 14^th October 2023 from 11.00 a.m. till 7.00 p.m. of 17^th

¶52

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶53

October, 2023. It is needless to state that the complainant shall pick the children up from the residence of respondent on 14^th October 2023 at 11.00 am and drop them back safely on 17^th October 2023 at 7.00 p.m. at the residence of respondent. We further make it clear that in view of this arrangement, the respondent-accused need not handover the custody of children on the intervening Sunday. We also make it clear that during the period of visitation rights, the complainant shall not prevent the respondent-accused from communicating with the children by telephonic mode ie., by making phone calls or video calls.

¶54

Ordered accordingly and the Complaint of contempt is disposed off.

¶55

JUDGMENT IN M.F.A. No. 3481 OF 2020

¶56

In view of the modified arrangement of visitation rights and in the back drop of submissions of the parties, nothing remains to be decided in this appeal and as such, M.F.A. is also disposed off.

¶57

NC: 2023:KHC:37172-DB CCC No. 325 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 3481 of 2020

¶58

¶59

All pending I.As. stand disposed off. Registry to send

¶60

back the records to the trial Court.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Snb/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Sriram Ramachandran v. Sangeetha Sriram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sriram Ramachandran v. Sangeetha Sriram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Vinay Gandhi Vs Sri.K.M.Ramesh

The Management of M/S Mulberry Silks Ltd. Vs Mr M G Chowdappa

Neekunj Todi Vs Sri.R. J Prakashan

Smt Divya S G Vs Sri Shivapratap U v

M/S Mach Aero Components Private Limited Vs Basavalingaswamy

Rajarajeshwari Dental College and Hospital Vs Dr. Sanjay Murgod