Ajmer Kaur vs General Public and Another

Arvind Kumar, J.—A petition u/s 8 of the Guradian and Wards Act, 1890, filed by the petitioner Ajmer Kaur is pending against general public as well as Sharanjit Kaur, wherein she has sought for her appointment as guardian of minors Navdeep Kaur and Mehakdeep Kaur, with respect to their person and property. During the pendency of the petition, respondent Sharanjit Kaur filed an application u/s 12 of the Act ibid seeking the temporary custody of her minor daughters claiming that her mother-in-law Ajmer Kaur, the grand-mother of the minors, is an old and infirm lady and is not in a position to look after the interests of the minors and that she being the mother is otherwise their natural guardian. The petitioner contested the application on the ground that Sharanjit Kaur, the widow after the death of her husband Tirath Pal, left the minor daughters with her (petitioner Ajmer Kaur) after taking huge amount and Sharanjit Kaur has no interest in them and she is going to contract second marriage.

The trial court after having considered the rival contentions of the parties-partly allowed the application by granting liberty to respondent Sharanjit Kaur to meet her minor daughters in the Court once in the month and also directed the petitioner to bring minor daughters on festival and on special occasions. Dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner Ajmer Kaur has preferred the instant petition.

The arguments have been heard.

The dominant matter for consideration of the Court is the welfare of the child. But the welfare of the child is not to be measured by money only nor by physical comfort only. The word "welfare" must be taken in its widest sense. The Court has to consider, therefore, the whole of the circumstances of the case. Sharanjit Kaur is the mother of the minors. Thus, keeping in view this proposition and in the light of the averments made by the respective parties, the learned trial court has rightly granted the aforesaid concession to the respondent Sharanjit Kaur, of meeting with her minor daughters. The order is only as a temporary measure and that too at this stage. No illegality or perversity could be found out in the impugned order passed by the trial court. The petition is wholly without merit and is accordingly dismissed.