KURIAN C JOSE Vs. MEENA JOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the counter petitioner in O.P.(G&W) No.2% of 1991 on the file of the District Court, Ernakulam. Respondent instituted O.P.(G & W) 296 of 1991 under S.9, 10 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short 'the Act') praying that she may be appointed the guardian of her minor son Anith who is now living with his father, the appellant. The child was born on 23-3-1985; and when the O.P. was filed he was aged 5 1/2 years.

(2.) Appellant and respondent have two sons of whom Anith is the elder and the younger is aged 21/2 years. The younger son is living with the respondent. The parties are Christians. Respondent alleged that in April 1990 appellant developed illicit relationship with Sona Mammen, her youngest sister which culminated in her elopement with the appellant and that PW-2 the mother of the respondent had to file O.P.7396 of 1990 for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus. Both the appellant and Sona Mammen appeared before the court and stated that they are living together of their free will and consent and that she has attained majority. Respondent alleged that the appellant is keeping the said Sona Mammen as his concubine. She also alleged, the appellant used to consume liquor. Therefore, she alleged that, it is against the welfare of Anith to permit him to be with the appellant. Respondent is residing with her mother and her another sister at Ernakulam; she is in a position to provide necessary education and maintain him.

(3.) Appellant contended that Sona Mammen is residing with the appellant only as his sister inlaw, that the minor child is studying in the First Standard in Girideepam English Medium School at Kanjikuzhi, Kottayam and that his mother is looking after the welfare of the appellant and his son. He maintained that his mother is rich and capable of looking after her only son the appellant and his minor son. He contended that the respondent does not have sufficient means to maintain the minor.