Point of Law: Section 8 of Family Courts Act is very clear with regard to exclusion of jurisdiction and pending proceedings where a Family Court has been established for any area.

ORDER :

This matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This revision petition is filed questioning the order passed by the Trial Court in dismissing I.A.No.3 in G and WC No.4/2023 dated 17.04.2023

3. The respondents in G and WC No.4/2023 filed I.A.No.3 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC praying the Court to dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction. In support of the application, an affidavit is sworn to by respondent No.2 that the respondents and their grandchildren are residing at Arehalli Village and the petitioners are not residing within the jurisdiction of the Court, as such the Family Court has got jurisdiction to entertain this petition. The cause of action also not arose within the jurisdiction of the Court. This petition is filed based on false facts stated by the petitioners and hence prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

4. In response to the application, the objection statement was filed by the petitioners contending that the District Court has got jurisdiction under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (‘the Act’ for short) and this case has been made over to the said Court which has got jurisdiction to decide this petition. The Trial Court having considered the pleadings of the parties, framed the point for consideration whether I.A.No.3 filed by the respondents under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC seeking rejection of the petition for want of jurisdiction deserves to be allowed. The Trial Court having considered the grounds urged in the application as well as the objection statement, extracted Section 9 of the Act, wherein it is stated with regard to the Court having jurisdiction to entertain the application and also taken note of the fact that originally the petition was filed before the District Court and the same was made over to the said Court by virtue of Section 4A of the Act. Hence, comes to the conclusion that the Court is having jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present revision petition is filed.

5. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners before this Court is that ought to have filed the petition before the Family Court and not before the District Court and the very order has resulted in miscarriage of justice. The learned counsel submits that minor children are residing in Arehalli along with the petitioners and minor child was studying in LKG in Euro Kids School and study certificate is also produced. The Family Court is having jurisdiction to entertain the G and WC petition and not the District Court. The order passed by the Trial Court is erroneous and not in accordance with law. Hence, it requires interference of this Court.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would vehemently contend that the petition is filed before the District Court and the relief sought is under the Guardians and Wards Act and Section 9 of the Act is very clear with regard to the territorial jurisdiction and the petition is filed under Section 10 of the Act, wherein sought for the relief of appointment of guardian and the Trial Court rightly taken note of Section 10 of the Act and rightly comes to the conclusion that jurisdiction vests with the District Court and accordingly the petition is filed before the District Court and matter was assigned to the competent Court and the competent Court passed the order.

7. The learned counsel for the respondents in support of his argument relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of RUCHI MAJOO v. SANJEEV MAJOO reported in 2011 (6) SCC 479 and brought to the notice of this Court the principles laid down in the judgment with regard to the territorial jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Act. Determination of – test for, stated – Test for determining jurisdiction, held, is place of ordinary residence of the minor and intention to make that place one’s ordinary abode and Section 9(1) of the Act also discuss