Allowed

Seema Kumari & Ors. v. Prem Chandq

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2011TA/433/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant-wife applied for transfer of a custody petition regarding minor children from Ferozepur to Moga. The court held that since the respondent resides at Moga and the minor children are maintained there, the District Court at Moga has jurisdiction. The transfer application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of the custody petition from the Court of Guardian Judge, Ferozepur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Moga.

Seema Kumari & Ors. Vs Prem Chandq — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

TA No.433 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA No.433 of 2011

¶5

Date of decision : 05.10.2011

¶6

Seema Kumar and others

...Applicants

Versus

Prem Chand

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶12

Present: Mr. A.S. Barnala, Advocate for the applicant.

¶13

Respondent ex parte.

¶14

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶15

The present application has been preferred by the applicantwife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Prem Chand Vs. Seema Kumar and others’, filed by the respondent (Annexure P-1), seeking custody of the minor children born out of the wedlock, from the Court of learned Guardian Judge, Freozepur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Moga.

¶16

As per the office report, service could not be effected as the respondent is not residing at the given address. However, from the perusal of Annexure P-1, it emerges that the respondent has mentioned the same address in the application. In this view of the matter, the

¶17

TA No.433 of 2011 2

¶18

service of the respondent is deemed to be complete. As nobody has caused appearance on his behalf, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte.

¶19

The applicant-wife is residing at Moga. The respondenthusband filed application (Annexure P-1), before the learned Guardian Judge, Ferozepur, on the ground that the applicant-wife has remarried. However, this fact has been categorically denied by the applicant. She is herself maintaining her two minor children at Moga.

¶20

As per Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, an application with respect to the guardian of the person of the minor, shall be made to the District Court having jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides. Prima facie, the District Courts at Moga has the jurisdiction to entertain and try the application.

¶21

In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the application (Annexure P-1) titled as ‘Prem Chand Vs. Seema Kumari and others’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Guardian Judge, Ferozepur, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Moga. The entire record pertaining to the application (Annexure P-1), shall be sent by the trial Court at Ferozepur, to the learned District Judge, Moga, within three weeks. 6. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned District

¶22

Judge, Moga, on _________.

¶23

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶24

05.10.2011 atulsethi

¶25

TA No.433 of 2011

¶26

¶27

Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No

Seema Kumari & Ors. v. Prem Chandq

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Kumari & Ors. v. Prem Chandq

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

Jagbir Singh Vs Manjit Kaur and Ors.

Jagbir Singh Vs Kirandeep Kaur and Ors,.

Surja Ram Vs Satbir Singh & Ors.

Ram Kumar Vs Hemo Prabha Saikia and Ors.

Babita Vs Chander Pal Sharma

Aarti Narula Vs Sanjay Kumar Narula