LAWS(MPH)-2006-1-55

RAJIV CHOUKSEY Vs. KIRTI CHOUKSEY

Decided On January 27, 2006
RAJIV CHOUKSEY Appellant
V/S
KIRTI CHOUKSEY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 47 of the Guardian and Wards Act is directed against the order dated 29-8-2005 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Hoshangabad, in G & W Case No. 03/05 dismissing the appellant's application for the custody of Child Ayan Chouksey.

(2.) Brief facts of the case lying in a narrow compass and relevant to the decision of this appeal are apt to be dilated hereunder; Marriage between appellant Raju Chouksey and respondent Smt. Kirti Chouksey was performed on 26-7-97, In this wedlock respondent No. 2 was born on 1-1-99. The appellant filed an application under Guardian and Wards Act inter alia on the ground that the marital life of the parties was not happy. Respondent wife always used to quarrel with the husband and his family members. She made a false complaint against the husband and other family members and got a case under Sections 489-A, IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered against the appellant. The respondent No. 1 is a mentally abnormal woman. Several times she made attempts to commit suicide. The respondent No. 1 used to beat Ayan and sometimes used to throw him. She never showered love on him. Till 11-8-03 appellant and respondent No. 1 lived together at Gadarwara and thereafter respondent No. 1 started living at her parental home and never returned. While living at Gadarwara she never bothered for the education of child Ayan. Ayan is a student of National Public School, Gadarwara. Because of the regular absence from the school, his education will suffer therefore, child Ayan may be given in the custody of the applicant father.

(3.) The respondent No. 1 controverted the allegations made in the application by filing a written statement. She stated that child Ayan was born at Hoshangabad. The applicant and the members of his family did not even come to see the child. The appellant has no love for the child. Presently the child is in her custody and she is taking every care of the child. The child is getting his education. The appellant is a business executive and in connection with his business he very frequently goes out of Gadarwara. The appellant and his parents never cared for the child. The" life of the child is happy and safe with the mother,