VINAYAK RAO JADHAV Vs. SHWETA VINAYAK RAO JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT would be the "ordinary residence" of a three year old child-a male child in this case? Can a minor of this tender age exhibit his "intention" to reside at a particular place or express a desire as to where he would like to reside. One way to look at this question would be to link his residence with the natural guardian. The minor in this case is not residing with father but with parents of the father. Mother has custody of a female child, she is seeking custody of her minor son. A petition has been preferred under section 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). An objection has been taken to the maintainability of the petition. It is pleaded that courts at Gwalior have no jurisdiction and the petition should be filed at Delhi where the minor is said to be staying with his grand parents. The trial Court found no merit in the objection so taken by the father and grand parents of the minor. Dissatisfied with the same, they have preferred this petition.

(2.) SOME other facts which are relevant for the purposes of this petition be also noticed.

(3.) THE respondent mother is having custody of a female child of two years. She has also taken proceeding against her husband under sections 498-A and 506-B of the Indian Penal Code. The father is residing at Dewas in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The grand parents as noticed above, are residing at New Delhi. To repeat minor is said to be at present with petitioner 2 and 3, that is the grand parents.