JAGDISH Vs. SUNITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Unsuccessful petitioner/appellant Jagdish has preferred the instant appeal, feeling dissatisfied against judgment dated 30.03.2013, passed by the learned District Judge, Family Court, Ambala, whereby a petition under Sections 7, 10 and 12 of The Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (for short, "the Act") seeking custody of his daughter namely Ritu was dismissed. Undeniably, marriage of the appellant/petitioner was solemnized with respondent Smt. Sunita and a female child namely, Ritu was born on May 28, 2000 out of their wed lock, who was about 9 years of age at the time of filing of the petition before the learned trial court and has been residing with the respondent i.e. mother. Some differences arose between the parties. Ultimately, they preferred a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and their marriage was dissolved vide judgment and decree dated December 12, 2002.

(2.) The statement of Smt. Sunita was recorded in the aforesaid proceedings and at that time, it was specifically stated by her that dispute between the parties have been settled and nothing remains, towards the respondent (Appellant/petitioner in the instant case) and even on behalf of the child. But subsequently, appellant/petitioner had preferred a petition seeking custody of the minor child on September 23, 2009 i.e. after about 7 years of dissolution of their marriage.

(3.) It is pretty settled that while considering the shifting of the custody of the minor child, the welfare of the child is of paramount consideration. For determining 'welfare' of the child, the questions to be considered are:-