NAVIN SCARIAH Vs. PRIYA ABRAHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that he has approached this Court through this contempt case under the impression - which perhaps is not true any more - that the mother is not allowing the child to interact with him, in spite of the directions in the judgment earlier delivered.

(2.) Smt.Smruthi Sasidharan - learned counsel for the petitioner, explained that his client filed this contempt case not to invoke any action against the respondent, but under the afore wrong impression; but that his real intent is to be part of his child's life, as any father would wish for. She thus prayed that this contempt case be closed; but that it be clarified that her client can be part of the schooling and therapy sessions of his child - she being a special one - so that his obligations as a parent can be discharged by him to his satisfaction.

(3.) Sri.V.Philip Mathews - learned counsel for the respondent, in response, began saying that his client has never violated the orders of this Court, but that the child was unwilling to go to the father, primarily because she is a special one and also since she was suffering from certain physical indispositions at the relevant time. He showed us certain documents - which his client has placed on record in substantiation along with IA No.1/2025.