Dismissed

Avtar Singh v. Manjit Kaur

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Aug 2013FAO/3148/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a Family Appeal (FAO) filed by a father against an order dismissing his application for custody of his minor son under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act. The High Court observed that the child, who was 5.5 years old at the time of the original application, has now attained majority. Consequently, the court held the appeal to be infructuous as the issue of custody no longer exists.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as infructuous because the minor child had attained the age of majority.

Avtar Singh Vs Manjit Kaur — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

FAO No.3148 of 1999

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

FAO No.3148 of 1999 Date of decision: 13.08.2013

Avtar Singh

.....Appellant

versus

Manjit Kaur

.... Respondent

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SARON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.BANGARH

¶11

Present: None.

¶12

S.S. SARON, J.

¶13

Avtar Singh-appellant on 08.08.1997 filed an application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act before the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sunam seeking custody of his minor son namely Amninderjit alias Amninder Pal Singh who was in the custody of his wife Manjit Kaur (respondent) and for appointing him as his guardian.

¶14

The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 09.12.1990. They lived together as husband and wife. Out of the marriage they had a minor son namely Amninderjit alias Amninder Pal Singh who was 5 ½ years old at the time of filing the petition.

¶15

The learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sunam vide impugned order dated 24.08.1999 dismissed the application of the appellant. Aggrieved against the same, the appellant filed the

¶16

Amit Kaundal 2013.08.22 12:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

-2-

¶18

FAO No.3148 of 1999

¶19

present appeal which was admitted on 08.11.2000 and “no stay” was ordered.

¶20

As already noticed, the minor at the time of filing the application by the appellant for his appointment as guradian on 08.08.1997 was 5 ½ years. Therefore, at present the minor Amninderjit alias Amninder Pal Singh has attained the age of majority and the question of seeking his custody and appointment of the appellant as his guardian no longer survives. It is now for him to live wherever he wants. In the circumstances, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous as the minor has attained the age of majority.

¶21

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as having been rendered

¶22

infructuous.

¶23

(S.S. SARON) JUDGE

¶24

(S.P. BANGARH) 13.08.2013 JUDGE A.Kaundal

¶25

Amit Kaundal 2013.08.22 12:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Avtar Singh v. Manjit Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avtar Singh v. Manjit Kaur

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

Banwari Lal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Ravi Khandelwal Vs Armed Forces Tribunal and Ors.

Surinder Mohan Joshi and Anr. Vs Sushil Kumar Sharma and Anr.

Sushila Rani Vs Nashima Jindal

Venatagireppa Vs Union of India & Ors.

(O&M) Amarjit Singh Vs Kuldeep Kaur