R. SANTHAKUMARI Vs. S. NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act filed by the mother of the minor child impleading the father of the child as the respondent. The petitioner and the respondent were married about a few years back and the minor child which was 16 months old on the date of the petition is their only child. Both the petitioner and the respondent are school teachers. They had been originally living with the respondent's parents at N.G.O.'s colony, Adambakkam, Madras -16. After February, 1970 the petitioner and the respondent set up a separate house -hold at No. 14, First Gross Street, Lake Area, Nungambakkam, where they had been living with the minor child till about 1st December, 1970. It is common ground that on or about 1st December, 1970 the petitioner and the respondent parted company though the cause for such parting is differently stated by the parties. According to the petitioner the respondent had been ill -treating her for some time prior to that date because of a mistress by name Jayalakshmi, who is also a school teacher and it is because of that she had to leave the respondent's house in Nungambakkam and go over to her own sister's house. According to the respondent, the allegation of his having intimacy with one Jayalakshmi is absolutely baseless, that he never ill treated the petitioner and that the petitioner had always been desiring to live with her sister due to the evil advice of her sister and brothers who have been always having an eye over the petitioner's salary.

(2.) NO oral evidence was let in, but certain documents were exhibited. Exhibits P -1 to P -5 are the notice, reply notice, rejoinder, etc., which passed between the parties prior to the filing of this petition. Exhibits P -6 and P -7 are the teachers' address books maintained in the Corporation Girls' High School, Saidapet, where Jayalakshmi, the alleged mistress of the respondent is working as a music teacher. These two books have been exhibited for the purpose of showing that Jayalakshmi has given the address of the respondent as hers in the school records, and the contention is that it is because of her illicit relationship with the respondent she has chosen to give that address in the school. The respondent has filed one document and that is marked as Exhibit R -1. It is a letter, dated 4th February, 1970 written by Sundaravaradan., one of the brothers of the petitioner to the respondent. Sundaravaradan is in Bombay and it appears that the respondent had written to the said Sundaravaradan making certain complaints against the petitioner herein and Exhibit R -1 is the reply from Sundaravaradan to the respondent.

(3.) THE question for consideration is, whether the petitioner is entitled to custody of the minor child which is now with the respondent -father.