( 1 ) AMARESWARI, J. :- This appeal relates to the custody of three minor children, a boy of 13 years, a girl aged 12 years and a boy of 10 years. The appellant Sheela was married to the respondent Jeevanlal, both Hindus on 28-6-1972. The respondent was working as a Chowkidar in the Chief Engineer s Office, Picket, Secunderabad drawing a gross salary of Rs. 843/- and after deductions a net of Rs. 600/- and odd. The appellant was a housewife at the time of marriage. They had three children, two sons and one daughter. The last child was born in 1977. After the birth of the last child, the appellant underwent tubectomy operation. According to the appellant-wife, the husband respondent never treated the family well, he was coming home in a drunken state and was often abusing the wife and children. He was playing cards and keeping bad company. It is her case that in September, 1985, he drove her out. She had taken a separate house in Olettuguda, next to the house of her mother and ever since, she has been residing there. The children who were till then studying in the defence school were admitted in the English Medium schools at Mettuguda, so that they may be nearer to their new home. To support herself and the children, the appellant had taken up a job and she was working as a Teacher in Pratapagiri Memorial School on a salary of Rs. 1200/- per month. In the year 1984, she filed O. P. No. 297 of 1984 for divorce on the grounds of desertion and cruelty by the husband. The O. P. was allowed on 5-12-1984 and an ex parte decree of divorce was passed. After waiting for six months, she married one William on 10-6-1985. The marriage was solemnized under the Special Marriage Act. Mr. Williams is a Christian. She has not changed her religion.

( 2 ) ON 11-6-1985 i. e. , the next day after her marriage with Williams, the husband filed a petition to set aside the ex parte order after condoning the delay. The said petitions were allowed and the ex parte decree was set aside. The wife carried the matter in revision to the High Court unsuccessfully. The petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty is pending.

( 3 ) DURING these proceedings, the respondent husband made an attempt to take away the children. The wife then filed O. S. No. 1994 of 1984 in the Court of the VIIIth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court for an injunction restraining the husband from interfering with the custody of children. The Civil Court ordered status quo as on 12-6-1985 (Ex. A-2 ). The Children are thus with the mother always.

( 4 ) THEREAFTER the husband filed O. P. No. 137 of 1985 out of which the present appeal arises for custody of the children under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. Later he amended the petition by including Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardian ship Act, 1956.

( 5 ) THE appellant resisted the petition contending that the husband was addicted to all vices, that he is a drunkard, he spends the entire salary on his bad habits and the minors interests would be adversely affected if they are entrusted to the father. She also stated that he has a large family with parents, two sisters and three brothers and the meagre income he gets is hardly sufficient to have a decent living. She further stated that she has taken up the employment only to support the children and she gets a salary of Rs. 1200/- per month.

( 6 ) IN support of their contentions, the parties adduced evidence. On an evaluation of the material on record, the trial Court allowed the petition of the father and granted custody of the children to him.

( 7 ) AGGRIEVED thereby the wife has now come up in this appeal. The main contention of Mr. R. V. Subba Rao the learned counsel for the appellant is that the trial Court has committed a serious error in granting custody of the minor children to the father ignoring the paramount consideration, namely, the welfare of the minors. It is submitted that the circumstances relied upon by the Court below, namely (1) that the wife ha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document