V N SUDANANDAN Vs. DR CHITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The above civil revision petition is directed against the fair and decretal order dated 11.7.1997 made in I.A.No.1118 of 1996 in guardian O.P.No.41 of 1996 by the Court of District Judge, Pudukottai.

(2.) THE petitioner in the main guardian O.P. is the wife and the respondent therein is the husband. THE main guardian O.P. has been filed by the wife under Secs.7 and 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act seeking to appoint her as the guardian of her minor son Gowtham, born through the respondent therein and to direct the respondent therein to handover the custody of the child with the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent would also contend that the very revision petition could not lie as against the fair and decretal order passed by the District Court concerned, within the meaning of Sec.115, C.P.C. But, at the same time, the learned counsel for the respondent is not able to satisfy the court with the authorities of law as to how such a revision petition cannot lie before this Court as against the fair and decretal order passed by the lower court. It is a final order passed by the lower court in an Interlocutory Application and there is no doubt that a revision could lie under Sec.115 of the C.P.C. before this Court and hence this legal argument advanced on the part of the learned counsel for the respondent is without basis and the same is hereby rejected.