Allowed

Rajiv v. Shivali

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Aug 2013TA/155/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a transfer application under Section 24 CPC, the High Court allowed the transfer of a guardianship petition pending in Hisar to Panipat, as the minor children reside there, in accordance with jurisdiction rules under the Guardian and Wards Act.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 pending in Hisar is ordered withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Panipat.

Rajiv Vs Shivali — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar #1# 2013.08.29 10:37I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 155/2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA 155/2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.8.2013

¶5

Rajiv

¶6

.............Petitioner

¶7

¶8

Shivali

¶9

.............Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:None for the petitioner-husband.

¶12

Mr. Harshit Jain, Advocate for Mr. Rose Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-wife.

¶13

Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).

¶14

Petitioner-husband has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC for the transfer of petition filed by respondent husband under Section 25 of Guardian and Ward Act, 1890 ( for short “the Act”) titled Shivali Vs. Rajiv from the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panipat.

¶15

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 19.7.2000 at Hisar and out of the said wedlock two sons were born. Due to temperamental dispute, it is alleged that the respondent left the matrimonial home and started residing at her parental home at Hisar whereas both the minor sons are residing with the petitioner at Panipat.

¶16

It is averred that the respondent wife filed a petition under

¶17

#2#

¶18

TA 155/2013 (O&M)

¶19

25 of the Act, which is now pending in the Court of learned learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the respondent and perused the paper book.

¶21

It is not in dispute that the provisions of Sub Section (1) of Section 9 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (for short “the Act”) provide that the application in respect of the guardianship of the person of the minor has to be made before a court having jurisdiction, where the minor ordinarily resides.

¶22

In the context of provisions of aforesaid Section 9(1) of the Act and that minor children are residing at Panipat and taking into account the distance between the aforesaid two stations, the present petition is allowed and the petition under Section 25 of the Act titled as Shivali Vs. Rajiv pending in the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Panipat for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶23

August 21, 2013 manoj

¶24

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

Rajiv v. Shivali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv v. Shivali

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

Mangal Singh Vs Darshan Singh & Anr.

Romi Vs Narinder Singh

Richa Vs Surender Kumar

Boor Singh Lalia Vs Sandesh Kaur

Pritpal Singh Vs Baljit Kaur

Rajinder Kaur Vs Balwinder Kaur