SHEILA UMESH TAHILIANI Vs. SALI PHIROZSHAW SHROFF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 by the petitioner for the custody of her minor son named Malcolm. The petitioner who was formerly a Zoroastrian by faith was married to one Kersi Soli Shroff according to the rites and tenets of the Zoroastrian religion. The said Kersi Shroff died in Bombay on the 18th of April, 1979 under rather tragic circumstances. On 13th March, 1979 i.e. about a month prior to the death of the said Kersi the petitioner gave birth to a son, whose custody is the subject of the present controversy.

(2.) Respondents 1 and 2 are the father and mother respectively of the deceased Kersi. Respondent No. 3 is the maternal grand-mother of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 is the father of the petitioner. Shortly after the birth of the minor Malcolm, the petitioner and her deceased husband appear to have separated. On 21st March, 1979 the deceased Kersi left the flat at Andheri where he cohabited with the petitioner and went to reside with his parents respondents 1 and 2. On 18th April, 1979, Kersi took an over-dose of sleeping tablets and died as a result thereof. Between 10th June, 1979 and 7th July, 1979 the petitioner resided with her maternal grand-mother, respondent No. 3 . It appears that the petitioner had been brought up by respondent No. 3 from her childhood. From 7th July, 1979 the petitioner began to reside at her flat at Andheri. At some stage the petitioner, it appears, became friendly with one Umesh Tahiliani whom she later married. It, however, is not clear on the pleadings as to when the acquaintance had begun, whether before or after the death of Kersi, her first husband. That fact, however, is no longer pertinent. What is pertinent is that on the 16th of August, 1979 the petitioner embraced Hindu religion and was married to the said Umesh Tahiliani on the same day according to Hindu Vedic rites at the Arya Samaj, Bombay.

(3.) Soon after her second marriage, the petitioner went out of Bombay for about three or four weeks along with the said Umesh Tahiliani. During this time, she requested respondent No. 3 to keep her minor son in her custody, which the respondent No. 3 agreed to do.