APPEAL under Section 47 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 8 of the Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956 against the fair and decretal order dated 02.1.2024 made in GWOP. No.6 of 2023 on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Mettur.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the fair and decretal order dated 02.1.2024 made in G.W.O.P.No.6 of 2023 on the file of the Additional District Court (Fast Track Court), Mettur (for short, the Court below) wherein he is seeking for the custody of his grandson – one minor child – S.Yuvan, who was born on 01.3.2008.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. The facts leading to filing of this appeal are as follows:

(i) The appellant filed G.W.O.P.No.6 of 2023 before the Court below seeking for the custody of his minor grandson, who was then a minor on the ground that the first respondent is his daughter in law, that she was married to his son – one Mr.V.Selvaraj in the year 2007, that due to the wedlock, his grandson – the said minor boy - S.Yuvan was born to them, that there was some misunderstanding between his son and the first respondent, that on 04.9.2011, his son was found dead under suspicious circumstances, that the appellant gave a complaint, which resulted in the registration of a first information report in Crime No.410 of 2011 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Karumalaikoodal Police Station, that in the course of investigation, it came to light that his son – the said Mr.V.Selvaraj died due to strangulation, that thereafter, a final report was before the concerned Court for offences under Section 302 and Section 201 read with Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, that it was taken on file in S.C.No.160 of 2013, that the Trial Court, by judgment dated 14.11.2022, found the first respondent guilty of the offences and sentenced her to undergo life imprisonment and that therefore, he sought for the custody of his grandson – the said minor S.Yuvan. The further ground that was taken was that the first respondent – his daughter in law continuing to have the custody of the minor child would not be in the best interest of the child.

(ii) Before the Court below, the first respondent filed a counter and denied the allegations regarding the commission of murder against her husband. In so far as the care and custody of the said minor child S.Yuvan was concerned, the first respondent took a stand that right through, he was in the care and custody of the first respondent and that there was no reason to appoint the appellant as the guardian and grant the custody of the said minor S.Yuvan.

(iii) The Court below, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the said minor child S.Yuvan was in the care and custody right through with the first respondent and that therefore, it would not be in the welfare of the child to handover the custody to the appellant. The Court below also made it clear that as a grandparent, the appellant had every right to visit his grandson and also directed the first respondent to permit the appellant to visit and interact with the said minor child S.Yuvan. Aggrieved by that, the above appeal has been filed before this Court under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 8 of the Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956.

4. When the above appeal came up for hearing on 13.7.2026, it was brought to the notice of this Court that the said minor S.Yuvan became a major. In view of the same, this Court passed the following order on 13.7.2026 :

“Mr.R.Nalliyappan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the 1st respondent, who is the contesting respondent in this case.

Considering the nature of grounds that have been raised in the present appeal, this Court is inclined to direct the grand son of the appe