(Sanjay Kumar, J)

A custody battle between the paternal grandparents and the mother for the person and properties of the children, Karuturi Hema Bindu, aged 16 years, and Karuturi Venkata Satya Sai Durga Vamsi Kiran, aged nearly 12 years. By order dated 03.03.2010, the District Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry, allowed GOP No.258 of 2008 filed by the mother holding that she was entitled to the custody of the children and their properties being their natural guardian and directing the paternal grandparents to render a true and proper account of the income and expenditure in respect of the children’s properties from May, 2003. Hence, the present appeal under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1890’) by the paternal grandparents. Late Karuturi Venkata Srinivasa Rao, the son of the appellants, married the respondent herein, Krishna Veni Durga Kumari, on 11.03.1993. At the time of the marriage the respondent was studying First Year LL.B. Course at Eluru, West Godavari District. She claimed to have discontinued the same upon the advice of her husband and in-laws and shifted her residence to her marital home at Pasivedala Village, Kovvur Mandal, West Godavari District. A daughter, Hema Bindu, was born to the couple on 06.08.1994 and a son, Vamsi Kiran, on 30.12.1998. While so, Karuturi Venkata Srinivasa Rao met with an untimely death on 06.05.2003 due to a snakebite. His widow, the respondent, however continued to be under the protection of her in-laws, the appellants herein. She stated that she was very much upset owing to the sudden death of her husband and was steeped in deep grief and shock. She further stated that she was subjected to the ancient tradition of disfiguring of a widow, against her will. On account of these circumstances, she said that she was depressed and did not come out of the house for a long period.

It is her case that her father-in-law, the first appellant, assumed management of the properties that belonged to her and her late husband. She claimed that the first appellant obtained her signatures on blank papers stating that they were necessary for various purposes including filing of a case against the Government Doctor at Kovvur for his alleged negligence in treating her late husband, which contributed to his death. She further stated that sometime thereafter, with a view to provide proper education to her children, she shifted residence to Rajahmundry from Pasivedala Village. The children were thereupon admitted in Jassver English Medium School at Rajahmundry. It is her further case that in September, 2005 the first appellant took her to the Lok Adalat at Rajahmundry and asked her to sign on certain papers stating that they related to the compromise of the damages suit filed against the Government Doctor for negligence. She claimed that she was not permitted to read those papers prior to affixing her signatures thereon. She further claimed that she blindly signed upon them without knowing the contents as she believed the first appellant and had implicit faith in him. It is her case that upon the lapse of two years after the death of her husband she decided to remarry for protection of her person and property and also of her children as she had lost her husband at a very young age. Marriage negotiations are said to have commenced in June, 2005 and she married one Kolli Raja Sekhar, a widower from Hyderabad in December, 2005. According to her, after the summer vacation of 2006 the appellants took the children to Pasivedala Village when she went to her husband’s house at Hyderabad and thereafter refused to send them to her and did not permit her to visit them.

The first appellant is stated to have claimed that he had obtained a decree from the Lok Adalat at Rajahmundry regarding the custody of the children and their properties and that there was no need to send them to her. The respondent claimed that she applied for a certified copy of the decree at this stage