Allowed transfer of a custody petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 from Civil Judge Bathinda to Guardian Judge Rajpura, holding that the minor's ordinary residence at Rajpura constituted the proper forum under Section 9 of the Act.
Application allowed; custody case transferred from Civil Judge, Bathinda to Guardian Judge, Rajpura.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
TA No.261 of 2008
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
TA No.261 of 2008 Date of Decision: 27.11.2008 Poonam and another .....Applicants Vs. Krishan Kumar ....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
Present : Mrs.Gurnam Kaur Turka, Advocate for the applicants. Mr.Manish Bansal, Advocate for the respondent.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)
Prayer in this application filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is for transfer of a petition filed by the respondent under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') titled as “Krishan Kumar V. Dayala “Ram and another” for custody of the minor child from the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bathinda, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Rajpura.
Counsel for the applicant submits that as per Section 9 of the Act, a petition praying for custody of the person of a minor has to be filed within the jurisdiction of a Court, where the minor ordinarily resides. In the present case, as the minor ordinarily resides at Rajpura, Distt.Patiala, the petition be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Rajpura.
Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that as
2
TA No.261 of 2008
the child originally resided with the respondent at Bathinda, there is no ground to transfer the petition to Rajpura.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and after giving my thoughtful consideration to the facts noticed herein above hold that it would be just and expedient that the case is transferred from the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bathinda, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rajpura. Section 9 of the Act postulates that a petition praying for the custody of the person of a minor shall be filed at the ordinary place of his residence. The minor is residing at Rajpura and, therefore, the respondent should have filed the petition under the Act at Rajpura.
As a result, the application is allowed and the case filed under Section 25 of the Act, titled as “Krishan Kumar V. Dayala Ram and another” pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bathinda, is transferred to the Guardian Judge at Rajpura. The Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Bathinda, is directed to forthwith transmit the file of the aforementioned case to the Guardian Judge, Rajpura.
Parties are directed to appear before the transferee Court at Rajpura on 17.12.2008.
27.11.2008 GS
(RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the custody petition filed by the respondent should be transferred from Bathinda to Rajpura under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Poonam
Krishan Kumar
Rajive Bhalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
