KOMAL Vs. ARVIND KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal under section 47 of Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1890'), wrongly mentioned as Section 19 Family Court Act, 1984 is to judgement dated 1.5.2017, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Baghpat, in Misc. Case No. 01 of 2013 (Smt. Komal Vs. Arvind Kumar), under section 25 of Act 1890 whereby claim of plaintiff mother for custody of her minor children has been rejected.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Krishna Mohan Tiwari, learned counsel for appellant and Mr. Mahesh Sharma, learned counsel for respondent.

(3.) It transpires from record that marriage of appellant was solemnized with respondent Arvind Kumar on 22.2.1999 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. After marriage, appellant came to her matrimonial home and discharged her espousal obligations. Inspite of aforesaid, respondent and his family members did not extend love and affection to appellant. Their conduct towards appellant was vindictive and aspersions were cast upon her for not bringing sufficient dowry. The matrimonial bond however continued and from wedlock of appellant and respondent, a daughter namely, Chavi and a son namely, Nakul were born. It is alleged by appellant that respondent was a drunkard and under spell of intoxication, used to assault and abuse appellant. Ultimately, appellant alleges to have been ousted from her matrimonial home on 16.2.2010 but custody of minor children was retained by respondent. Apprehending damage to the personality of her minor children on account of bad habits of respondents and further that they may not come up with strong moral character, coupled with refusal on part of respondent to hand over custody of minor children, appellant filed Suit No. 01 of 2013 (Smt. Komal Vs. Arvind Kumar) under section 25 of Act, 1890, claiming custody of her minor children. It was also pleaded by appellant that respondent is not paying required interest for welfare of minor children. They are unable to study properly. The minor daughter of appellant is being looked after by her grand mother. As appellant is capable of looking after her minor children and also a natural guardian of minor children, therefore, their custody be given to appellant.