MARY VANITHA Vs. BABU ROYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this petition is the mother of the two minors, viz., 1. Merlin Diana and 2. Maria Roshan and the wife of the respondent, Babu Royan. She filed this petition under Secs.7 to 10 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act for appointing herself as guardian of the two minors aged about 5 years and 3 years respectively and direct entrustment of custody of the two minors to her from the respondent.

(2.) IT is an admitted fact that the petitioner is employed as Administrative Manager, Resorts International Private Limited, Century Plaza, Mount Road, Madras-18 and respondent who was employed as Manager in Sakthi Finance, Shastri Nagar, Madras now working in the said company at their Coimbatore branch on transfer. He is working the said company for the last few months.

(3.) THIS petition was resisted by the respondent. It is stated in the counter statement, 19th June, 1991 filed in the main petition that the petitioner had forfeited her right to guardian of the children and for their custody and that the petitioner had abandoned children for the sake, of cheap pleasure of living in adultery with one Mr.Ignatius, none other than the respondent's brother-in-law and that the petitioner has been living adultery since end of March, 1991 and that therefore, she is unfit to be given the onerous of guardianship. The respondent has denied the other averments made in the petition. According to the respondent, the petitioner alone took a decision to abandon marital home, husband and children for the sake of her immoral life. In regard contention of the petitioner about the signing of the Muchalica, the respondent has that the petitioner has voluntarily executed a Panchayat Muchalica, admitting her adulterous life with Mr.Ignatius and agreed that the custody of the minor children should be with respondent. The respondent has also denied that the transfer to Coimbatore from was sought to prevent the petitioner from seeing the children. Both the children have admitted in School in Coimbatore. It is also denied that the petitioner is attached minor children or that she has been looking to the welfare of the children. On the contrary, the petitioner has been harsh and ill-treated them and she rarely looked after them. petitioner who has abandoned her matrimonial home and leading an immoral life should be allowed to go anywhere near the children and hence, the petitioner is not entitled custody of the children.