Sri Krishnaiah T H vs Sri M A Govindaraju on 10 September, 2018

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Krishnaiah T H vs Sri M A Govindaraju on 10 September, 2018

Bench: B.V. Nagarathna

                          1



  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA


    WRIT PETITION NOS.16589-16590/2018(GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KRISHNAIAH T.H.,
S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAIAH,
AGED 83 YEARS,
RESIDENT AT 6121, 8TH MAIN,
3RD CROSS, ASHOK NAGAR,
TUMAKURU CITY - 572 103.
                                      ... PETITIONER

(By Sri. V. RANGARAMU, Advocate)

AND:

  1. SRI. M.A. GOVINDARAJU,
     S/O. LATE ASHWATHAIAH,
     AGED 50 YEARS,

  2. SMT. YASHODHA K.,
     W/O. M.A. GOVINDARAJU,
     AGED 45 YEARS,

       BOTH ARE RESIDENT AT ;
       5TH MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHARADHAMBA
       COLLEGE, ASHOKA NAGARA,
       TUMAKURU - 572 103.
                                    ....RESPONDENTS
                              2



      These writ petitions are filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to quash or set aside the
impugned order passed on maintainability in G &
W.C.No.6/2017 order dated 06.02,2018 passed by the
Principal Judge of Family Court at Tumakuru vide Annex.A,
etc.

      These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing this day, the Court made the following;

                          ORDER

Petitioner is the maternal grand father of minor boy Guru Prasad G. He filed a petition under Section 7 of the Guardians & Wards Act, 1890, seeking a declaration that he may be appointed as a guardian of the minor child as against the parents who were arrayed as respondents in the said petition.

2. The respondents/parents appeared before the trial Court and filed their objections and submitted that the custody of the minor son was given to them with the help of the Sub-Inspector of Police, Tumakuru and that they have admitted their minor son to a residential school at Udupi District on 28/08/2014 and he is prosecuting his studies in IX standard in the said school since the 3 academic year 2017-18. They objected to the petitioner, who is the maternal grand father, seeking a declaration to appoint him as guardian particularly, when the natural parents are alive, as he is not entitled to seek custody and guardianship of the minor child. In the circumstances, the trial Court has dismissed the petition on the ground of maintainability. Being aggrieved by the said order, petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and perused the material on record.

4. When the natural parents who are respondents herein are alive, maternal grand father has no right to seek a declaration that he is the guardian of minor child. In the circumstances, the trial Court was justified in dismissing the petition. There is no merit in these writ petitions.

5. Hence, writ petitions are dismissed. 4 At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner being the maternal grand father may have visitation rights to visit his grand child. In order to exercise the said right, petitioner may approach the respondents in that regard and thereafter exercise his right in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE Msu

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court