Disposed

Anoop Sundaram v. Amruthaveni Vishwanathan

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2026CCC/943/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil contempt petition alleging breach of an interim custody order granting a father Sunday and holiday custody of his minor son. The court found no unequivocal direction on whether the child must be brought to Bengaluru or handed over in Kerala, so no willful disobedience was made out.

What did the court decide?

None; complaint closed with liberty to seek clarificatory orders from the trial court.

Anoop Sundaram Vs Amruthaveni Vishwanathan — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:9177-DB CCC No. 943 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 943 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

ANOOP SUNDARAM S/O SR. SUNDARAM VISHWANATH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO. 310J, C BLOCK MJ LIFESTYLE ASTYLEEN HOSA ROAD, CHOODASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 099

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

(BY SMT. RASHMI GEORGE, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AMRUTHAVENI VISHWANATHAN W/O ANOOP SUNADARAM AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.205, A2 BLOCK MJ AZALIA, CENTRAL JAIL ROAD CHOODASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 099

¶16

ALSO AT C/O B VALSALAKUMAR NEELAKKANATHU THGIRUMALABHAGOM P O KUNTHIATHIDE, ALAPUZHA KERALA - 688 530

¶17

…ACCUSED

¶18

(BY SRI. SUMAN K S., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ASHA R., ADVOCATE)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:9177-DB CCC No. 943 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 10 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HER WILFUL, DELIBERATE AND WANTON DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL IN G & WC NO.115/2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A & ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶27

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 06.06.2005 passed by the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru in G & WC No.115/2023.

¶28

In terms of the said order, the complainant was entitled to interim custody of his minor son on every Sunday and public holidays from 10.00 a.m. to 08.00 p.m., till disposal of the said petition. The accused was also directed to hand over the custody of the minor child to the complainant in terms of the said order.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:9177-DB CCC No. 943 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

It is the complainant's case that the said direction has not been complied with.

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the accused submits that there is no impediment for the complainant to visit the accused in Kerala (G6, Icloud Nimbus, Murukkum Puzha P O, Trivandrum, Kerala, PIN Code - 695 302) where she and the minor child are now residing. In the event the complainant visits the child on Sundays or any other public holidays, she would hand over the child to him, for the period as set out in the order, the dis-obedience of which is alleged.

¶34

The learned counsel for the complainant states that the complainant is in Bengaluru and therefore the accused is required to bring the child to Bengaluru. She also points out that there was an interim order dated 19.10.2024, whereby the accused was restrained from taking the child out of the jurisdiction of the court. However, the said order was not extended after 04.01.2025.

¶35

It is apparent from the above, the controversy essentially is, whether the accused is required to bring the child to Bengaluru or whether the complainant can avail the interim custody by visiting

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:9177-DB CCC No. 943 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

the residence of the accused in Kerala. There are no unequivocal directions issued by the court in this regard and therefore we are unable to accept that any proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are required to be initiated for willful disobedience of the order dated 06.06.2025.

¶40

The complaint is, accordingly, closed.

¶41

However, this order would not preclude the parties from approaching the learned trial court for further interim orders including a clarificatory order.

¶42

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶43

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶44

KMV

¶45

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25

Anoop Sundaram v. Amruthaveni Vishwanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Sundaram v. Amruthaveni Vishwanathan

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

Dr Raju D S Vs Sri Udayshankar S Bhyrappa

Dr Archana N v Vs Sri Udayshankar S Bhyrappa

Dr. Srinivas Bojanapu Vs D Krishna

Koti Trading Company Vs Sri.Gurudatta Hegde

Smt.Devamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Nkp Abdul Azeez Vs Smt Faizya Farook