GULSHAN Vs. SUSHIL KUMARÂ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated March 6, 1991, passed by the District Judge, Sri Ganganagar, by which the learned District Judge dismissed the application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act filed by the appellant Smt. Gulshan,

(2.) SMT Gulshan was married to Sushil Kumar on April 24, 1980. Out of this wed-lock, a son, namely, Rahul was born on June 14, 1981, at Gazlabad. Some dispute arose between Gulshan and Sushil Kumar and a petition for dissolution of the marriage was filed in the Court of the District Judge, Sri Ganganagar. In the proceedings for the dissolution of the marriage, the parties arrived at a compromise, and the learned District Judge, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties, passed a decree of divorce on July 28, 1988, In the compromise, if was agreed that the custody of the son Rahul will remain with the father Sushil Kumar and the mother SMT. Gulshan will be free to meet her son Rahul after making a demand for the same by a prior notice of fifteen days. The appellant thereafter filed an application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act (for short, the Act) for the custody of her minor son Rahul on the ground that her husband Shushil Kumar has contracted second marriage and, therefore, it will be in the interest and W welfare of the minor Rahul that the child may be given in the custody of the mother Gulshan. It is, also, mentioned in the application that she gave a notice to Sushil Kumar to arrange for a meeting with her son Rahul, but Sushil Kumar did not arrange for any such meeting and did not permit her to meet with her son Rahul, the application under Section 25 of the Act, moved by the appellant for the custody of her minor son Rahul, was dismissed by the learned District Judge on the ground that the judgment passed by the competent Court for the custody of the minor Rahul under Section 25 of the Act was final and no appeal against that order was filed and, therefore, he is not competent to review its order and to re-hear the same. It is against this order dated March 6, 1991, passed by the learned District Judge, Sri Ganganagar, that the present miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the appellant SMT. Gulshan.