GHULAM MOHAMMED, J.

( 1 ) THE unsuccessful petitioner-appellant preferred this appeal against the order dated 22-4-1998 in O. P. No. 801 of 1994 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy.

( 2 ) THE above O. P. No. 801 of 1994 was preferred by the appellant-natural father of the wards, under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, (for short "the Act"), for custody of minor children by name Shravani and Shravanti.

( 3 ) FOR the purpose of convenience, the parties are addressed as petitioner and respondents as per their array in O. P. No. 801 of 1994.

( 4 ) THE petitioner married the deceased on 12-9-1983 as per the Hindu rites and customs at Kanchibhavan, Ramkote, Hyderabad. Smt. Geetha joined the petitioner for marital life at petitioner s house. Smt. Geetha gave birth to twins namely Shravani and Shravanthi on 6-9-1986 at Swapna Nursing Home, Hyderabad. The cradle ceremony of the twins was performed at her mother s house and subsequently Smt. Geetha came to the petitioner s house.

( 5 ) IT is stated that petitioner s family is a joint family headed by their father Manchala Shankaraiah who, however, died on 23-5-1991. Smt. Geetha lived with the petitioner happily till 23-7-1987. On 21-7-1987 Smt. Geetha and the petitioner visited the house of the respondents for attending annual ceremony of father of Smt. Geetha and they returned to Bhongir. It is further stated that on 23-7-1987 on the midnight Smt. Geetha committed suicide. It is stated that a partnership business in the name of Shri Radhakrishna Tiles Factory consisting of the brother of the petitioner, her sister s husband, namely Uppalanchi Muralidhar Rao and V. Lingam ran into losses and came to be closed. Smt. Geetha demanded her sister s husband Muralidhar Rao and her sister to settle the affairs of the said factory for which they did not respond and her brothers and mother did not extent the support to her demand. Having disgusted with the attitude of the respondents she committed suicide.

( 6 ) IT is further stated that the minor children were ten months old as on the date of the death of Smt. Geetha. On the morning of 24-7-1987 all the respondents came to Bhongir and without proper enquiries with the petitioner and other members of his family, the 1st respondent lodged a complaint in Bhongir Police Station. The Police registered a case against the petitioner and other members of his family under Section 304-B, IPC. After completion of the investigation the police filed a final report stating that it is a mistake of fact. The respondents have taken the children to their house at Hyderabad and brought them back to Bhongir on the next day and they requested the petitioner to show extra care (sic) on the children. The children were with them for six months and an amount of Rs. 1,00,000. 00 each in the name of the children was deposited by the petitioner in UTI Children Growth Fund.

( 7 ) HAVING noticed this deposit, the respondents approached the petitioner and requested him to send the children to their house for some time on the ground that the petitioner did not recover from mental shock due to sudden demise of his wife. They promised the petitioner to send the children once or twice in a week to be with him for a day or two. The petitioner reluctantly conceded to the request of the respondents. The respondents have kept up their promise for one year and later changed their mind and did not permit the petitioner to visit their house to see the children. The petitioner demanded the respondents to send back his children. But the respondents postponed the matter on one pretext or the other and got them admitted in Princeton Public School, Hyderabad. The petitioner used to visit the school to see the children but the respondents did not even like his visits and informed the school authorities not to permit the petitioner to see the children. Thus, it is stated that the respondents have kept the children away from the petitioner in a planned manner.

( 8 )

Click Here to Read the rest of this document