BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 23.01.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA C.M.A.(MD)No. 571 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD)Nos.4954 of 2022 & 3978 of 2023 M.Jeya ... Appellant/ Respondent Vs.

A.Rajesh ...Respondent / Petitioner PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 47 of Guardian and Wards Act, to set aside the order dated 06.04.2022 made in G.W.O.P.No.343 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Kanniyakumari District at Nagercoil and allow this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

For Appellant : Mr.V.Meenakshisundaram For Respondent : Mrs.B.Deepa

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of this Court was delivered by R.POORNIMA, J.

The Appellant/Respondent/Grand mother has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the order dated 06.04.2022 passed in G.W.O.P.No.343 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Kanniyakumari District at Nagercoil.

2.Brief case of the petition before the lower Court is as follows:

(a)The petitioner, who is the father of the minor child, namely R.G. Sai Rithin, filed the petition under Sections 7 and 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, seeking appointment as guardian and for custody of the minor child.

(b)The petitioner is the son-in-law of the respondent. He married the respondent’s daughter, Gayathiri, on 03.06.2018. Thereafter, they resided together at the petitioner’s house. Out of the wedlock, a male child, R.G.Sai Rithin, was born on 29.03.2019. On 31.05.2019, due to ill health, the petitioner’s wife passed away at KIMS Hospital. At the instance of the respondent, the final rites were conducted at the respondent’s residence on 01.06.2019. It was stated that, as per custom, the minor child was to remain at the respondent’s house for fifteen days, for which the petitioner also accepted. Thereafter, the respondent agreed to hand over custody to the petitioner.

(c) The respondent is employed as a Draftsman in the Public Works Department. She has limited family support. Her mother, aged about 78 years, had undergone heart surgery and is unable to take care of the child. The respondent, being employed, leaves for work during the day, and the child is presently under the care of a known person.

(d) After completion of the fifteen-day's ceremony, the petitioner requested the respondent to hand over the custody of the minor child. However, the respondent refused. Subsequent efforts made through relatives on 25.08.2019 also proved unsuccessful. The petitioner contended that he, being the natural guardian, is hale and healthy, resides with his parents and brothers, and is fully capable of maintaining and caring for the child. Hence, he prayed for allowing the petition.

3. The respondent denied the allegations contending in the petition. She further contended that she had advanced a sum of Rs.2,07,000/- to the petitioner through a loan obtained from Axis Bank, and an additional sum of Rs.1,00,000/- obtained through a Self Help Group, alleging that the petitioner was unemployed and had failed to repay the amounts. She further alleged that the petitioner was addicted to alcohol and squandered money. According to the respondent, the petition was filed only to exert pressure on her.

4. The respondent further alleged that the petitioner had compelled her daughter to reside at his house soon after child's birth, failed to properly care for her, and that such neglect resulted in infection leading to her death. She stated that the minor child had continuously residing with her. During the petitioner’s care, the child allegedly suffered from pneumonia and dengue fever, after which the respondent took over the custody of the child and ensured proper treatment.

5. The respondent also contended that following her daughter’s demise, the petitioner initially refused to take custody of the child. She asserted that her daughter had expressed concern regarding the child’s safety in the petitioner’s house. Allegations were also made regarding the petitioner’s attem