Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 36765
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
,
SANGEETHA KUMARI. S – Appellant
Versus
PARTHAN K. S. R. – Respondent
OP(G&W) No.23/22
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents:
Jurisdiction in child custody cases should align with the child's ordinary residence.
Headnote:The petition seeks the transfer of OP(G&W) No.23/22, asserting the appropriate jurisdiction per Section 9(1) of the Guardian & Wards Act, 1890, given the child's ordinary residence. The respondent contests citing a related maintenance action. The court supports the transfer to Family Court, Punalur, affirming that the child's best interest aligns with residing with the mother. The court ruled the petition as allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction in custody cases based on child's residence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's observations on jurisdiction and custody application. (Para 4) |
| 3. petition allowed for case transfer. (Para 5) |
ORDER
(Dated this the 16th day of July, 2025)
This petition is filed by the petitioner for transferring of OP(G&W) No.23/22 pending on the file of Family Court, Kottarakara to Family Court, Punalur.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Section 9 (1) of the Guardian & Wards Act, 1890, the OP (G & W) shall be filed before the Court where the child ordinarily resides. Whereas, the petitioner is residing in parents house at Punalur jurisdiction, Kollam District. However, the respondent filed the petition at Family Court, Kottarakara. Therefore, the petitioner prays to transfer the same to Family Court, Punalur.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent objected the petition, mainly on the ground that the petitioner suppressed about the pendency of Maintenence petition, filed by her, which is pending in the same court and joint trial is fixed. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the respondent came from abroad, he filed application seeking interim custody of the child for a week as he wants to go back.
4. Having heard the arguments and perused the records. On perusal of the same, which reveals that as per section 7 of G &W Act, the petition should be filed where the child ordinarily resides. Now, the child is with the mother. Where, she is residing in Pathanapuram Taluk, Kollam District, which comes under the jurisdiction of Family Court, Punalur. Whereas, the respondent said to be in abroad and through power of attorney holder he filed petition for interim custody of the child. If at all, any interim custody requires he can puruse the matter before the Family Court, Punalur for seeking custody. The respondent counsel not produced any visa copy shows his visa is expires. Such being the case, this Court cannot grant any such time as prayed by the respondent counsel.
5. Accordingly, this petition is allowed.
