CHHINDO MADAN LAL Vs. MADAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Chhindo, wife of Madan Lal respondent, challenging order dated May 24, 1989, passed by the Gurdian Judge, Jalandhar, directing handing over the custody of two minor children, namely Chandi Devi and Deepak Kumar to Madan Lal. The order was passed on the application of Madan Lal filed under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act. The marriage of the parties was solemmised in 1968 at Jalandhar. Out of the wedlock six children were born. Out of them two died. The elder children Gurdial Singh and Amrit Kaur, students of 10th and 7th class, respectively, are residing with Madan Lal, the father. The petition for custody of the other two children Chandi Devi and Deepak Kumar was filed, Chhindo left the matrimonial house in June, 1986. When the husband objected to the visit of strangers she reacted sharply that she was at liberty to spend her time with any body. On that account she and the strangers gave injuries to Madan Lal on August 13, 1987. He got himself medically examined and lodged the report at Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar. He further alleged that Chhindo, the wife, had no source of income and had filed a separate application for maintenance for herself and for the two children. He being the natural guardian of the minor children was, thus, entitled to their custody.

(2.) CHHINDO contested the petition, inter alia, alleging that the same was filed as a counter blast to her application for the grant of maintenance. She denied the allegations levelled against her that she had relations with strangers. Those persons were stated to be her cousins. According to her the husband deserted her and left the matrimonial house along with the two children. It was denied that she or her cousions caused injuries to Madan Lal on August 13, 1986. She was maintaining the two children living with her. Her parents were providing food and other expenses for their education. She further alleged that Madan Lal after purchasing a plot had constructed the house about five years ago and had asked the wife to bring Rs. 10,000 from her parents. Since the amount was not paid he became angry and relation became strained. She approached Stree Sabha when she was given beating by him. He did not appear on the dates fixed by the Stree Sabha. She referred to the litigation pending between the parties i. e. application for maintenance and a petition for divorce filed by Madan Lal. In spite of the order of maintenance, no amount was paid by him for the maintenance of the children. It was further alleged that Madan Lal was working as a mason ; was expected to remain, out of house from 7. 00 a. m. to 6. 0. 0 p. m. and it would be in the interest of the minor children that they should continue staying with the mother who can well look after them. The Court framed the following issues:

(3.) MADAN Lal appeared himself as his own witness and examined Charan Singh, Udho Ram and Gurdial Singh (son) and Karam Singh. Chhindo appeared as her own witness and produced Moti Ram, Shingara Ram and Smt. Chain. Under issue No. 1 the Guardian Judge held that it would be in the interest of the minors that they should live with the father who was their natural guardian and entitled to custody under Sections 5 and 6 of the Act.