Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.20 seconds)Mrs. Elizabeth Dinshaw vs Arvand M. Dinshaw And Anr on 11 November, 1986
9. Coming now to the precedents dealing with the issue and so cited by learned counsel for the parties, reference can conveniently be made to the decision of Supreme Court in Mrs. Elzabeth Dinshaw v. Arvand M. Dinshaw, AIR 1987 SC 3, expressly approving the view of Willmer, LJ in Re. H (Infants) (1966) 1 All ER 886, which reads as follows (at P-6) :--
Smt. Surindar Kaur Sandhu vs Harbax Singh Sandhu & Anr on 11 April, 1984
Again, the Supreme Court in Smt. Surinder Kaur Sandhu v. Harbax Singh Sandhu, AIR 1984 SC 1224, observed that "the modern theory of conflict of laws recognises and, in any event, prefers the jurisdiction of the State which has the most intimate contact with the issues arising in the case. Jurisdiction is not attracted by the operation or creation of fortuitous circumstances such as the circumstances as to where the child, whose custody is in issue, is brought or for the time being lodged. To allow the assumption of jurisdiction by another State in such circumstances will only result in encouraging forum-shopping."
Mrs. Kuldeep Sidhu vs Chanan Singh And Ors. on 21 January, 1988
It requires to be mentioned that in Kuldeep Sidhu's case (supra), learned Judge relied on the observations given in Elzabeth Dinshaw (AIR 1987 SC 3) and Marilynn Anita Dhillon's cases (supra). The facts of the case aforesaid reveal that petitioner Kuldeep Sidhu and, her husband Gurbachan Singh were married in India in 1975 and were thereafter living in Canada. Navreet Sidhu, their son was born in 1978 and their daughter Preeti Sidhu was born in 1981. Sometime in 1984. the petitioner's husband Gurbachan Singh brought his son Navreel Sidhu to India and left him at his father's house in Jagraon (Punjab). About a year and half later, he brought his daughter to India too and left her here. Both the children were admitted in a nearby school and had been studying there since then. Towards the end of 1986, their father Gurbachan Singh came and took them back to Canada. The relations between the huband and wife became strained and they started living apart. Petitioner then approached the Court and obtained an order on November 21, 1986 from the Supreme Court of Ontario granting her interim custody of the children. This order also restrained the father from removing the children from the Province of Ontario. However, husband-Gurbachan Singh, on that very day, came away from Canada with the children and brought them to his father's house in Jagraon and that is where they had been ever since. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that Smt. Kuldeep Sidhu filed a criminal writ petition in this Court in which she succeeded.
The Guardians And Wards Act, 1890
1