CHARAN KAUR Vs. UJAGAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal at the instance of an unfortunate widow who is clamouring for the return and custody of her three minor children presently being brought up by their grandfather, the respondent. Married to one Harnek Singh in the year 1972 and blessed with three sons, namely, Gurcharanjit Singh, Surjit Singh and Gurbinder Singh, the appellant was moving on the wheel of normal life when she lost her husband in an accident on September 8, 1983. Shortly after the death of her husband, the appellant left the house/village of her in-laws after executing a writing Exhibit R. 1. On April 24, 1985, the appellant filed a petition under Section 25 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short 'the Act') for the return and custody of her minor children.

(2.) THE material facts of the case may now be stated. According to the appellant, at the time of death of her husband she had no source of income and, therefore, she was persuaded to leave the children with her father-in-law, the present respondent. She was later employed as Beldar with effect from June 1, 1984 and confirmed in her service on March 13, 1985. She was drawing a sum of Rs. 637. 30 paisa as her monthly salary and thus, has now got sufficient means to maintain her children. She alleged that her father-in-law was an old man of 65 years and had a meagre income. He had two unmarried daughters and a minor son to bring up. It was alleged that her children were not being properly looked after. The respondent wanted to deprive her from using the property of her late husband. She now having permanent source of income was capable of of taking care for the welfare of the children. The respondent resisted the petition and alleged that it was not on a proper form and thus, not maintainable. The respondent alleged that appellant left the house and by virtue of a writing she left the children under his care because she had no love or affection for them. The respondent claimed that he was an able-bodied person and drawing pension. It was alleged that the appellant had no source of residence and there is a large family of the parents of the appellant who are almost dependent on her.

(3.) WHILE issue No. 1 was decided against the respondent, issues 2 and 3 were answered in favour of the respondent and against the appellant. Resultantly, the petition was dismissed, by the Guardian Judge, Rupnagar by its order dated March 28, 1987.