V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH, J.

1. This application has been filed by the applicant, who is the respondent in the main O.P., praying for the dismissal of O.P.No.154 of 2008 as not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction.

2. Heard Mr.S.A.Rajan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.M.K.Kabir, learned senior counsel appearing for Mr.A.Dhiraviyanathan, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant would submit in his arguments that the petitioner in the main O.P. is the husband, and the respondent in the main O.P./ the applicant herein, was his wife and their marriage held on 01.08.1996 at Nagapattinan and out of their wedlock, first daughter Aysha Thabia was born in United Kingdom on 11.09.1997 and subsequently, twin female children namely, Farah and Rafah were born to the applicant on 11.12.1998 in India and the applicant/wife left India with her children to reside at United Kingdom along with her parents on 17.12.2006 and thereafter, on 28.03.2007 talaq was pronounced by the husband / petitioner and the Shariath Council at Chennai also recognised the same and the Shariath Council in London also granted divorce and after the lapse of nearly 30 months, the present O.P has been filed by the husband as petitioner seeking custody of all the three minor children under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Order 21 Rules 2 and 3 of Original Side Rules. He would further submit in his arguments that the children are admittedly in the custody of their mother, the applicant herein, and they have now become the citizens of United Kingdom and the applicant is now employed at United Kingdom as a teacher and the children are also studying in the same school, where the applicant / mother is working. He would further submit in his arguments that the husband has filed the main O.P for custody of three minor children, to which he is not entitled according to Mohammedan Law, because the custody of minor female children should be with the mother until they attain puberty. He would further submit in his arguments that a person who is in lawful custody of the minor children cannot be said to have removed the custody of those minors from lawful custody, when he or she takes those minor children with him/her, wherever he/she goes and in this case taking the children away with the applicant / mother would not amount to removal of custody from the respondent / father and therefore, it cannot be deemed that the applicant / mother removed the custody of three minor children from the respondent / husband on 17.12.2006 and it cannot be considered as a cause of action for filing the O.P at Chennai. He would further submit in his arguments that the Mohammedan Law, Section 102 would categorically define the persons who are eligible for custody of the minor and according to the said Section, the minor female children should be in the custody of mother till they attain puberty and all the three minor female children of the applicant and the respondent did not attain puberty on the date of leaving for United Kingdom, i.e., on 17.12.2006 and therefore, it cannot be considered as removal of custody from the respondent. He would further submit in his arguments that Section 95 of the Mohammedan Law would also deal with the minority of children in Islam and accordingly, a female child is not considered to be a major person, unless she attains puberty and other children are deemed to have attained the age of majority at 21 years when guardian has been appointed under Guardians and Wards Act and in any other case, 18 years of age is considered for becoming major, and in this case, all the three children are female children and therefore, the attainment of puberty will only govern the minority of the children. He would also submit in his arguments that it was informed by the applicant that the first child alone attain puberty long after the filing of main O.P. He would also cite a judgment of Calcutta Hig