PAVITHRI Vs. PRASAD KARTHIKEYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is against Ext.P2 order. Inter alia, it is contended that the G.O.(P) itself is not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction. Ext.P2 order was passed even prior to the raising of the objections regarding territorial jurisdiction. Under Ext.P2 order, the child aged 17 years now was directed to be handed over to the father, i.e. the respondent herein - petitioner in the Guardian and Wards O.P. before the court below. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has no instruction from the respondent. Ext.P2 order has not been complied with and the same has now become infructuous and unnecessary.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if before passing any further interim order relating to the custody of the child, the court below considers the objections relating to jurisdiction and ascertains the response of the child also. We are satisfied that the said request can be accepted.

(3.) In the result