( 1 ) THE opposite party moved an application under S. 25 of Guardians and wards Act read with Section 6 of the Hindu minority and Guardianship Act for appointment of guardian and custody of minor abhineet. The opposite party is the father and the applicant is the mother of the minor. The applicant contested the application. She also raised a preliminary objection that minor Abhineet is ordinarily residing in gauhati (Assam) and, therefore, the District judge, Ghaziabad has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application. The trial Court decided this matter as a preliminary objection and hats held that the application can be entertained and decided at ghaziabad. Aggrieved by it, the present revision has been preferred.

( 2 ) I have heard Sri V. K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Miss Usha kiran, learned counsel for the ppposite party.

( 3 ) THE position is not disputed that Sec tion 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act provide that if the application is for appointment of guardian of the person of the minor, it shall be made to the District Judge having jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides.

( 4 ) IT is contended by the lea