RAJINDER KAUR Vs. NARINDERPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the wife challenging the order dated 30.9.2013 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kapurthala whereby the petition filed by her under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 read with Sections 7 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (in short "the Act") for custody of minor children Amritpal Singh (born on 7.12.1997), Simranpal Singh (born on 22.8.1999) and Varinder Kaur (born on 7.2.2002), was dismissed. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein are that the marriage of the parties was solemnized in the year 1997 as per Sikh religious rites and ceremonies at Bholath, District Kapurthala. Out of the said wedlock, two sons and a daughter, namely, Amritpal Singh, Simranpal Singh (both sons) and Varinder Kaur (daughter) were born. The appellant filed a petition seeking custody of the children who are residing with the respondent at village Talwandi Kuka, inter alia, pleading that they wanted to live with the appellant as the respondent had no love and affection towards them; the appellant was thrown out of the matrimonial house by the respondent for not fulfilling the demand of dowry; there was no proper care and custody of the children as the respondent who was a driver by profession and used to remain out of house for days; the behavior of the respondent was rude and cruel towards the children and he used to beat them under the influence of liquor; the appellant was running a beauty parlour and was earning handsomely and she could provide good education to them. The appellant demanded custody of the minor children from the respondent many a times but to no effect which led to the filing the petition for custody of the children. The said petition was contested by the respondent by filing a written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections, it was pleaded that the appellant levelled false allegations against the respondent about his character. She left the company of the respondent and the children in August, 2008 on her own accord. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues:-

(2.) The trial court on appreciation of evidence led by the parties, decided issue No. 1 against the appellant and in favour of the respondent. Issue No. 2 was decided as not being pressed. Accordingly, the trial court vide order dated 30.9.2013 dismissed the petition. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent is not taking proper care of the children and his behavior towards the children is very rude and cruel. Learned counsel further submitted that even the children are being deprived of natural love and affection of the mother. He also submitted that the appellant is a natural and better guardian than the respondent and can provide better access to education and livelihood.