ASHU KHURANA DUTT Vs. ANEESHA ASHU DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) This guardianship petition is filed purportedly under Sections 6 and 11 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. Prayer clause (a) of the petition seeks appointment of the Petitioner, who is the father of the two minors for whose guardianship the present petition is filed, as the guardian of the person of the minors. Secondly, it seeks reliefs concerning the property of the minors, particularly a declaration that the Respondent mother has unauthorisedly and fraudulently withdrawn or transferred amounts from the bank accounts of the minors for her personal use and benefit [prayer clause (aa)] and an order for recovery of these amounts either by making payment to the Petitioner as their natural guardian or by depositing the same in the bank accounts of the minors [prayer clause (b)].

(3.) In the first place, the main prayer in the petition, prayer clause (a), which is for appointment of guardian of the person of the minors, is not maintainable before this court. Section 7 read with Section 8 of the Family Courts Act reserves exclusive jurisdiction to entertain a suit or proceeding in relation to guardianship of the person of any minor unto Family Courts by virtue of Clause (f) of the Explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 7. A Full Bench of this court, in the case of Romila Jaidev Shroff vs Jaidev Rajnikant Shroff,2003 3 MhLJ 468 (FB) , has held so. The Full Bench has observed that in view of the provisions of the Family Courts Act, the court exercising its ordinary original civil jurisdiction relating to matters under the Family Courts Act would lose its jurisdiction to the Family Court, since the former would be a district court and under Section 17 of the Family Courts Act that Act would have an overriding effect. In view of the Full Bench decision of this court, which was referred to, and the proposition of law set out wherein was reiterated, by a learned Single Judge of this court in the case of Girish J. Bobade vs. Ajay Thakur , 2006 2 MhLJ 702 , the matter does not admit of any controversy. An application for guardianship of the minor's person can lie only before the Family Court.