IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2010 / 9TH MAGHA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 123 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN MA.399/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT: ------------------------- R.D.PRAGASH RAJ, S/O.RAJAGOPAL, AGED 39 YEARS, 'GOURI SADANAM', SOUBHAGYA LANE, BURMA ROAD, KUMARAPURAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ANIL RESPONDENT(S)/APPELLANT: ------------------------ JAYALAKSHMI, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.GOPI, LEKSHMI SADANAM, VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------- Contempt Case (C) No.123 OF 2010 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Raman,J. The petitioner is the respondent in Mat.Appeal.No.399 of 2008, which was disposed of by this Court by judgment dated 5th September, 2008, based on a compromise between the parties, as per which, the children, who are under the care and protection of the petitioner/father shall handover the children to the respondent/mother for one week each during Onam and Christmas holidays and for a period of one month during mid summer vacation. According to the petitioner, after the last Christmas vacation, the child was not returned to the father, and therefore, there is contempt. If the arrangement made between the parties is in any way broken by the respondent/mother, one of the parties, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the Cont.Case.123/10 2 Family Court and this is not a fit case for contempt. Leaving open such right, the contempt case is closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE prp