TRIPTA DEVI Vs. SAT PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal is directed against the order, whereby petition, under Sections 7,8 and 10 of the Guardians & Wards Act, 1890, filed by respondent Sat Pal against appellant Tripta Devi, has been allowed and the custody of the minor son of the parties, named Tara Chand has been ordered to be given to the respondent.

(2.) RESPONDENT filed a petition, under Sections 7,8 and 10 of the Guardians & Wards Act, 1890, seeking custody of his minor son. The allegations that were made in the petition may be summed up thus. Marriage between the respondent and the appellant had taken place in the year 1985 and out of the wedlock two children, one female named Promila, aged 9 years and the other male named Tara Chand, aged 6 years, were born. Male child Tara Chand was born on 26.7.1991. The respondent is employed as a Peon in a Central School at Chandigarh. The female child has been living with him from the very beginning and he has got her admitted in the Central School. In the year 1992, the appellant, without informing the respondent left the matrimonial home at Chandigarh and carried with her the minor son of the parties. Ever-since she has been residing in village Dhamandari in Una District with her parents. She does not have any source of income and because of that she is unable to maintain and educate the minor son properly. The respondent made various efforts to bring the appellant back to the matrimonial home, but to no avail. The appellant instead of returning to the matrimonial home, filed a petition seeking award of maintenance allowance, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. She also filed a petition, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. Both these petitions stand dismissed. The respondent alleged that he, being employed in a Government school and, therefore, having regular monthly income, enough to sustain himself and to bring up the two children, was in a better position to maintain, bring up and to give education to the children compared to the appellant.

(3.) THE trial Court, after recording the evidence of the parties, has returned the finding that the welfare of the minor lies in his custody being with the respondent, who is in Government service at Chandigarh and can, therefore, provide better maintenance and education to the children. Consequently, the petition has been allowed and the custody of the minor son of the parties has been ordered to be given to the respondent.