Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Bom) 916

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
R.I. CHAGLA J.
Vincy Cajetan Noronha and Others - Petitioners
Versus
Steffi Genovevo Fernandes - Respondent
Guardianship Petition Nos. 1, 2, 13 of 2024, Interim Application (L) Nos. 10387, 21047, Interim Application (L) No. 31480 of 2023
Decided On : 28-04-2025

Advocates Appeared:
Ms. Susan Abraham a/w Mr. Narayan Suvarna, Ms. Poojasri Ganesan for the Petitioners in GP/1/2024 and GP/13/2024 and for
Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in GP/2/2024.
Mr. Rajendra Sorankar i/by Ketan Dabke for the Petitioner in
GP/2/2024 and for the Respondent in GP/1/2024 and GP/13/2024.
Mr. Abhijit N. Desai for Respondent No. 1 in GP/2/2024

The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in custody disputes, prioritizing emotional bonds over financial stability.

Headnote:
(A) Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Sections 7 and 17 - Guardianship of minor - Petitioners sought custody of minor Yohan Johnny Sankaram, biological parents deceased - Respondent, caregiver since 2021, claimed to be the child's guardian - Court emphasized welfare of the child as paramount consideration, ruling that the Respondent's established bond with the child outweighed the Petitioners' claims. (Paras 5, 35, 50)

(B) Child Custody - The court must consider the emotional and psychological well-being of the child, not merely financial stability of guardians - The Respondent's ability to provide a nurturing environment was deemed more significant than the Petitioners' financial resources. (Paras 45, 46)

(C) Legal Principles - The court reiterated that custody decisions must prioritize the child's welfare, considering the child's attachment to the caregiver and the potential trauma of relocation. (Paras 36, 40)

Facts of the case:
The biological parents of Master Yohan were married and lived in Dubai; after the mother's death, the child was cared for by the Respondent, who had a close bond with him. The Petitioners, grandparents, sought custody, claiming they could provide better financial support.

Findings of Court:
The Respondent was declared the guardian of Master Yohan, with conditions for access to the Petitioners, emphasizing the child's established relationship with the Respondent.

Issues: The main issues included the suitability of the Respondent as a guardian and the welfare of Master Yohan post the demise of his parents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Respondent's established bond with Master Yohan and her role as a caregiver since 2021 justified her guardianship, despite the Petitioners' financial advantages.

Result: Guardianship Petition No. 2 of 2024 allowed; Guardianship Petition No. 1 of 2024 and Guardianship Petition No. 13 of 2024 dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

R.I. CHAGLA J.

1. By the Guardianship Petition No. 1 of 2024, the Petitioners had initially sought the relief of permanent custody of the minor Yohan Johnny Sankaram (“Master Yohan”) born on 3rd December 2016. The Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the grand-parents of Master Yohan and Petitioner No. 3 is their daughter, i.e. aunt of Master Yohan. Thereafter, by Guardianship Petition No. 13 of 2024 a fresh Guardianship Petition had been filed pursuant to directions of this Court. The Petitioners sought to be declared as Guardians of Master Yohan. This had also been sought by way of amendment to Guardianship Petition No. 1 of 2013.

2. Guardianship Petition No. 2 of 2024 has been filed by the Petitioner seeking her appointment and declaration as legal Guardian of Master Yohan and to look after the rights and interest in the properties mentioned in the Schedule of properties annexed at Exh.AA to the Guardianship Petition and to manage, administer and hold the same for and on behalf of Master Yohan till he turns major. The Petitioner has also sought for appointment of the Petitioner as competent person to pursue and/or initiate any proceedings as may be required or advised with respect to insurance scheme, all service benefit, PPF, Gratuity and other claims of whatsoever nature of deceased Johnny Sanakarm, i.e. biological father of Master Yohan with Respondent No.5 and/or with any other authorities or Court of law and also to prosecute the claim and receive the same in proceeding pending before the Motor Accident Tribunal Mumbai for and on behalf of Master Yohan.

3. For the sake of convenience, the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in Guardianship Petition No. 1 of 2024 and Guardianship Petition No. 13 of 2024 are referred to as “the Petitioners” and the Petitioner in Guardianship Petition No. 2 of 2024, who is the Respondent in Guardianship Petition No. 1 of 2024 and Guardianship Petition No.13 of 2024 is referred to as “the Respondent”.

4. It is necessary to refer to the material facts as borne out by the pleadings and evidence and which are as under :-

i. The biological parents of Master Yohan were married by way of civil marriage registered on 25th April 2013 in Dubai.

ii. The marriage of the biological parents of Master Yohan was solemnized in Goa at the Petitioners’ Parish Church - St.Alex Church, Calangute, Goa.

iii. Master Yohan was born in Dubai on 3rd December 2016.

iv. Upon birth of Master Yohan, the Petitioner No. 1 stayed in Dubai for three months between 5th December 2016 and 1st March 2017 with her daughter, Iona - biological mother of Master Yohan; Johnny – biological father of Master Yohan and Master Yohan for three months to take care of Iona and her grandson so that Johnny could work. Baptism of Master Yohan was arranged by his biological parents on or around 20th January 2017 in Dubai in the presence of Petitioner No. 1.

v. Master Yohan’s parents brought Master Yohan to celebrate his 1st birthday at the house of the Petitioners in Goa on 3rd December 2017, Master Yohan’s 2nd birthday too was celebrated on 3rd December 2018 with the Petitioners in Goa.

vi. Master Yohan’s 3rd birthday was celebrated on 3rd December 2019 with the Petitioners at their house in Mumbai.

vii. The Petitioners claimed to have maintained close relationship with the biological parents of Master Yohan between the years 2017 to 2021 through regular telephonic and video communications, as well as visits to each other in Goa and Dubai till the outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic.

viii. Iona’s health deteriorated during the second wave of the Covid pandamic. She expired on 10th February 2021 in Dubai and Johnny informed the Petitioners of her sudden demise.

ix. Johnny agreed to bring his wife’s body to India to be buried in Goa and the Petitioners as well as Johnny had to manage despite lockdown restrictions.

x. The Petitioners arranged Iona’s funeral on 27th February2021, when Johnny and Master Yohan reached Goa with Iona’s body and which was arranged at the Petitioners