Allowed

Shri Imadad Ahmed P.A. v. Smt Shahnaj Khanam

Karnataka HC18 Jul 2025CP/215/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a petition to transfer guardianship proceedings pending in Davanagere to Bangalore. The Court held Davanagere lacked jurisdiction as minors ordinarily reside in Bangalore under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

What did the court decide?

G & WC No.22/2023 pending before Family Court, Davanagere, transferred to the Court of the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bangalore.

Shri Imadad Ahmed P.A. Vs Smt Shahnaj Khanam — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶7

CIVIL PETITION NO. 215 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI IMADAD AHMED P.A. S/O AMEER AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 37/1B, AREKERE BANNERGHATTA ROAD, RENUGOPAL REDDY LAYOUT, AREKERE, BANGALORE - 560076.

¶10

Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SUMMAYA ANJUM P.A. D/O IMAD AHAMED AGED 10 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRSENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN HER FATHER PETITIONER NO.1,

¶12

ZAID AHMED P.A. D/O IMAD AHAMED AGED 7 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN HIS FATHER PETITIONER NO.1,

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. SHAHNAWAZ M. MAMADAPUR., ADVOCATE)

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

AND:

¶18

SMT SHAHNAJ KHANAM W/O SADDAM HUSAIN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1321/2, KTJ NAGAR, 2ND MAIN, 7TH CROSS, DAVANGERE - 577002.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(RESPONDENT IS SERVED)

¶21

THIS CIVIL PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE PETITION PENDING BEFORE THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT IN G & WC NO.22/2023 (ANNEXURE-B) TO THE PRL. FAMILY JUDGE, BANGALORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 9 OF THE GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT, 1890 AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

¶23

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The present petition is filed under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, by the husband seeking for transfer of G & WC

¶27

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

No.22/2023 pending before the Family Court, Davanagere¹ , to the Prl. Judge Family Court, Bangalore.

¶31

Heard submissions of learned counsel

¶32

Sri.Shahnawaz M Mamadapur, for the petitioners. Respondent is served and unrepresented.

¶33

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-wife has filed G & WC No.22/2023, which is pending before the Family Court, Davanagere, seeking for appointment as the natural guardian of the children of the petitioner No.1 and the respondent. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the children of the petitioner No.1 and the respondent are admittedly residing with the petitioner No.1 at Bangalore, and the same is forthcoming from the cause title to the petition in G & WC No.22/2023. That having regard to Section 9(1) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890² , the Trial Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon G & WC No.22/2023.

¶34

1 Hereinafter referred as to 'Trial Court'

¶35

2 Hereinafter referred as to 'Act'

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner have been considered and the material on record has been perused.

¶40

Admittedly, the respondent has instituted G & WC No.22/2023, which is pending before the Family Court, Davanagere. In the said petition, the petitioner No.1 herein is arrayed as respondent No.1 and the children who are the petitioners Nos.2 and 3 in the present petition are arrayed as respondent Nos.2 and 3 in G & WC No.22/2023. It is forthcoming from the cause title as well as the petition averments, even as per the case of the respondent put forth in the said G & WC No.22/2023, the children are residing with the petitioner No.1 at Bangalore.

¶41

Section 9(1) of the Act, stipulates that an application with respect to the guardianship of a minor shall be made to the District Court having jurisdiction in the place where the minor "ordinarily resides". In the present case it is clear that the children ordinarily reside in Bangalore.

¶42

It is clear from the aforementioned that the Family Court at Davanagere, does not have the jurisdiction to entertain G & WC No.22/2023.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

It is further relevant to note here that under

¶47

Section 24(5) of the CPC³ , the suit or proceeding may be transferred from the Court which has no jurisdiction to try the same.

¶48

Having regard to Section 24(5) of the CPC., and in view of the clear stipulation as contained in Section 9(1) of the Act, the relief sought for in the present petition is liable to be granted. Hence, the following;

¶49

ORDER

¶50

i) The above petition is allowed;

¶51

ii) G & WC No.22/2023 pending on the file of the Family Court, Davanagere, shall stand transferred to the Court of the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bangalore;

¶52

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Prl. Judge Family Court, Bangalore, on 22.08.2025, without the requirements of any further notice being issued in this regard;

¶53

3 Hereinafter referred as to 'CPC'

¶54

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:27122 CP No. 215 of 2024

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

iv) It shall be open to the learned Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, to assign the transferred case to an appropriate Court;

¶58

v) Consequent to transfer, the transferee Court shall conduct further proceedings in accordance with law;

¶59

vi) All the contentions of the parties on the merits of the matter kept open.

¶60

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶61

SRK

¶62

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Shri Imadad Ahmed P.A. v. Smt Shahnaj Khanam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Imadad Ahmed P.A. v. Smt Shahnaj Khanam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Varalakshmi M C Vs Sri. Jayanna M H

Luckman Shariff Vs Mohin Pathan

Dhanalakshmi Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt. N L Pallavi Vs Sri M R Ram

Smt. Sudha D v Vs Mr. S N Yashodhar

Smt. Yashaswini K C Vs Sri. H C Pratheek