LAWS(P&H)-1980-9-125

SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. AMARJIT KAUR

Decided On September 11, 1980
SUKHDEV SINGH Appellant
V/S
AMARJIT KAUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, filed on behalf of the appellant for the custody of his minor son Ram Singh alias Gulzar, who was born in November, 1970.

(2.) It is alleged in the application that the appellant was married to the respondent in the year 1969 and they lived together as husband and wife up to 1972, when the respondent left his husband's house along with her minor son, saying that she would come back within a week after seeing her father. Later on, she did not turn up and the left the society of her husband without reasonable cause. She is not properly looking after the minor child nor be is being given any proper education. According to the appellant, it is in the welfare and interest of the minor child that his custody be restored to him. Even otherwise also, he being the natural guardian of his minor son under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, is entitled to the custody of his minor son.

(3.) This application was resisted on the ground that the appellant had started maltreating the respondent just after the marriage. She was given beatings many a time and ultimately she was turned out of the house by the appellant twice and finally she was turned out in the year 1972. The appellant is in the habit of taking liquor and he is also a gambler. The appellant filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights Against her but the said application was consigned to the record room as he failed to pay her the maintenance pendent lite and expenses of litigation She further submitted that her minor child is studying in the school, i.e. Government Primary School, Bhagar Khurd, District Amritsar in 1st standard. Since the appellant never cared to see the minor child and never provided him maintenance, clothes or articles etc., it is in the interest and welfare of the minor child that he he allowed to continue in the custody of his mother-respondent. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed:-