JUDGMENT :

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.

1. Petitioner had approached the Family Court, Shimla by filing a petition under Section 25 of Guardian and Wards Act 1890 (in short ‘the Act’), against his wife and one other, for the custody of his minor son.

2. Learned District Judge/Family Court vide impugned order dated 3.11.2020 has returned the petition preferred by petitioner along with documents for its presentation before the appropriate Court of law with observation that matter is not within jurisdiction of his Court as minor son is not residing within jurisdiction of his Court. Reliance has also been placed by Family Court on a pronouncement of High Court of Allahabad in case of Dr.Vinay Samuel Arawattigi vs. Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur reported in AIR 2007 Allahabad 13.

3. Being aggrieved by aforesaid order passed by Family Court, Shimla, petitioner has approached this Court and has relied upon judgments passed by Apex Court in Ruchi Majoo vs. Sanjeev Majoo, reported in (2011)6 SCC 479; and also pronouncements of different High Courts in Ramesh Bhardwaj vs. Ram Saran Dass, reported in (1998-3) 120 P.L.R.35; Bhagyalakshmi and another vs. K. Narayana Rao reported in AIR 1983 Madras