NAGESH KUMAR PATHAK Vs. KRISHNA PATHAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents. The respondents have not appeared in spite of valid service of notice.

(2.) The petitioner/appellant is aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 27.06.2013, passed in Guardianship Case No. 09 of 2009, by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro, whereby the petition filed by the petitioner/appellant under Sec. 8 of the Guardians and Wards Act for guardianship of minor son Harshvardhan Pathak has been held to be not maintainable and the petitioner/appellant is not entitled to get the relief prayed for and accordingly suit has been dismissed.

(3.) Case of the petitioner/appellant in brief is that appellant was married with defendant no. 1/respondent no. 1 Krishna Pathak on 12.05.2001 at Bokaro Steel City as per Hindu rites and custom and out of their wedlock they were blessed with a son Harshvardhan Pathak on 05.11.2002 who is living under the care and protection of his maternal grandmother. After the marriage the appellant came to know about mental disease of his wife i.e. Schizophrenia and thereafter got her treated at Dehradun and Haridwar by specialist doctors. Though the doctors had prescribed medicines but the respondent no. 2 used to call her daughter (respondent no. 1) at her residence and used to threaten the appellant to implicate him in false cases. Lastly, appellant gave in writing to Women Helpline, Haridwar where he gave in writing that he will provide proper medicine to the respondent no. 1 and after one month respondent no. 1 will be brought to Haridwar at the residence of the petitioner. However, on false and flimsy allegations the respondent no. 2 did not allow the respondent no. 1 to reside at her matrimonial home. During eight years of marriage the respondent no. 1 lived for about 12 months only. The only aim and ambition of the respondents is to extort money from the appellant. The brother of the respondent no. 1 is unemployed and minor son of the appellant has been living with his widow maternal grandmother, who is dependent solely on the pension of her deceased husband. The mother of minor son is mentally ill and his maternal grandmother is herself facing financial hardship and the family situation will badly affect the upbringing and future of the minor. The appellant is well educated person and has sufficient income to maintain and up bring the minor Harshvardhan Pathak and as such, guardianship of minor son Harshvardhan Pathak be given to appellant who is biological father/natural guardian.