GIAN SINGH Vs. RAGHBIR KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the matter of grant of custody of a minor the par amount consideration is as to where lies welfare of the minor. Such a question is to be determined on facts and circumstances of each case.

(2.) The marriage between Gian Singh and Raghbir Kaur took place in June. 1982. On September 21, 1983 a male child was born out of their wed-lock who was named Parmjit Singh. The parties separated in December, 1983 and ultimately on the petition filled by Gian Singh, a decree of divorce was wanted on May 29, 1985. Thereafter, both Gian Singh and Raghbir Kaur re-married and now it is stated that both of them are having a child each from their new marriage. Gian Singh is residing in Calcutta. He is doing the business of Transport. Raghbir Kaur is now residing in village Magror, Tehsil and District Ropar. Gian Singh's application for custody of the minor child was contested and ultimately, the application was dismissed on February 16, 1990, by the Guardian Judge, Ropar. Hence, this Appeal by Gian Singh.

(3.) The broad facts as reproduced above are not in dispute. The contention of the Counsel for the appellant is two-fold. Firstly, it is stated that Gian Singh being the father of the minor male child is entitled to his custody as the natural guardian, more so, when Gian Singh is doing the business of Transport and can well maintain the child and look after his education. Secondly, it has been argued that Raghbir Kaur is at the mercy of her second husband and has no resources to look after the child or his education. I find no force in these contentions. Ever since the birth of Paramjit Sirgh minor, he has been living with Raghbir Kaur. Paramjit Singh is about six years old and during the pendency of the Appeal was got admitted in Satluj Public School, Ropar, under an arrangement as ordered by the Court. No doubt, father is the natural guardian and entitled to the custody of the male child, who is about six years old under Section 6 of the Guardians and Wards Act, but that per se is not a ground to allow custody of the child to the father. As already observed above, it is the welfare of the minor which is to weigh with the Court in the matter of grant of custody. Likewise, even if the father is rich and the mother is poor, cannot weigh with the Court to grant custody to the father and deprive the mother of bearing the child with natural love and affection, which is required most at the tender age of the minor. The fact that both father and mother have remarried and are having children from their new marriage, do not tilt the balance in favour of ether of the parties. What is considered most appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case is that Paramjit Singh, the minor should be educated in a good School without much disturbing the present environments in which he is residing and during his study in the School for a couple of years, the father should be permitted to have access to the child for developing fatherly affection with the child and it is only after the minor comes of the age of 1O or 12 years that he would be in a position to exercise his discretion, though not absolutely, as to where his interest would lay, either to leave the custody of the mother or not at this stage, it is considered appropriate that the minor should continue living with his mother and he should continue getting education in Satluj Public School, Ropar, where he has been admitted. The father would continue sending Rs. 3OO per month to the School direct to meet necessary expenses of the minor to show his bona fides. As and when the father visits the School, he would be permitted by the School to meet the child. The grand parents would also be permitted to meet the child on week ends as and when they visit the School. It is stated that there are long vacation in School either in June or in December, i. e. twice a year. The father would be permitted to have custody of the child from the School on the closing day of the long vacation in the month of December and produce the child, on the opening day of the School there. This is on experimental basis. For the other dispute regarding interim custody of the child in future the appellant would approach the Guardian Court again as and when occasion arises.