SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Decided On : 19.11.2018 vs Smt. Poonam Kumari on 19 November, 2018

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH    
         SHIMLA

CMPMO No. 91 of 2018

.

Decided on : 19.11.2018

 
         
           
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
Shri Rajbir Yadav          …..Petitioner. 
Versus

Smt. Poonam Kumari ….Respondent. 
Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1  Yes.

For the Petitioner:

For the Respondent:

 
         
           
 

           
             
 

           
 

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Parmar, Advocate. 

Ms. Anjana Khan, Advocate. 

           
             
             
             
             
             

Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)

The   instant   petition   stands   directed,   against,   the

impugned order pronounced by the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Nalagarh (Exercising the Power of District Judge, under

Guardian   and   Wards   Act),   District   Solan,   H.P.,   whereunder,   the

interim custody of the minor child namely Shivansh Yadav, was, till

disposal of the main petition, ordered to be handed over to his natural

guardian/respondent herein.

2. Without   adverting   to   the   merits   of   the   case,   the

paramount   fact,   rather   rests,   upon,   the   anvil   qua   the   petitioner

herein, through casting an application before the learned Court below,

hence   therethrough  seeking   rejection  of   the   plaint   or  return   of  the

1
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

24/11/2018 22:55:57 :::HCHP
2

petition, to the Court holding the jurisdiction.   The afore application

was instituted or filed subsequent to the learned trial Court making

the   impugned   decision   upon   the   afore   apposite   application.

.

Consequently, the learned trial Court was not enjoined to make  any

order thereon, before, its proceeding to make an affirmative decision,

upon,   Cr.M.A   No.   304/6   of   2017.   Conspicuously,     dehors,   the   afore

application standing filed subsequent to the impugned verdict, being

recorded, the factum qua existence of a specific mandate, in Section 9

of   the   Guardian     Wards   Act,   1890,   provisions   whereof   stand

extracted   hereinafter,   whereunder,   upon   ingredients   thereof’   being

satiated,  thereupon  even the assumption, of, jurisdiction, upon, the

apposite   application,   whereon   the   impugned   order   stood   rendered,

hence stood jurisdictionally stained.  

9. Court having jurisdiction to entertain application ­(1) If

the application is with respect to the guardianship of the person

of   the   minor   it   shall   be   made   to   the   District   Court   having

jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides.

(2). If the application is with respect to he guardianship of

the property of the minor, it may be made either to the District

Court having jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily

resides or to a District Court having jurisdiction in a place where

he has property.

(3).  If   application   with   respect   to   the   guardianship   of   the

property of a minor is made to a District Court other than that

having   jurisdiction   in   the   place   where   the   minor   ordinarily

resides, the Court may return the application if in its opinion the

24/11/2018 22:55:57 :::HCHP
3

application would be disposed of more justly or conveniently by

any other District Court having jurisdiction.”

3. The   learned   trial   Judge   was   hence   enjoined   to   make

.

discernments   from   the   memo   of   parties   qua,   whether,   the   minor

Shivansh   Yadav,   was,   thereat   residing   or   was   ordinarily   residing,

within,   the   territorial   jurisdiction,   of,   the   Court   located   at   Jhajjar.

Nowat, the memo of parties, further, discloses that the minor Child,

was, residing alongwith the petitioner at the matrimonial home, of,

the respondent herein, and only on 11.11.2017, it stands averred in

the   application,   qua   the   respondent   herein,   being   exiled,   from   her

matrimonial   home,   and,   thereat   the   custody,   of,   the   minor   child

rather being forcibly snatched from her by the petitioner herein.   The

afore averment, as, occurs in paragraph 3, of the petition, does prima­

facie,   discloses  qua   the   minor   child   at   the   stage   of   meteing,   of,   an

order   upon   the   apposite   application,   rather   ordinarily   residing,

within, the territorial jurisdiction, of, the Courts located at Jhajjar.

Consequently,   prima   facie   for   jurisdictional   disempowerment,   the

impugned   order   is   hence   quashed   and   set   aside.     The   matter   is

remanded   to   th   learned   trial   Court   concerned,   to,   after   making   a

decision, upon, an application, cast under the provisions of Order 7

Rule 11 CPC, to, thereafter, in case, it holds that the Court located at

Nalagarh, holds jurisdiction, to, try the main petition, and, make a

fresh decision, upon, the apposite application in accordance with law.

24/11/2018 22:55:57 :::HCHP
4

The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on

18.12.2018.     Till a decision is rendered upon the afore petition, the

petitioner   shall   continue   to   hold   custody   of   the   minor   child.     The

.

learned   trial   Judge   is   censured   for   his   making   prima­facie,   a,

jurisdictionally void verdict. 

All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.  

19th November,2018 (Sureshwar Thakur),
(priti) Judge. 

24/11/2018 22:55:57 :::HCHP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation