Nripendra Pathak vs Nityananda Pathak And 3 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1504 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010060072020




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                            Case No. : FAO/36/2020

         NRIPENDRA PATHAK
         S/O- LATE RABINDRA NATH PATHAK, R/O- CHENGA, BARCHENGA, P.S.
         TARABARI, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM.

         VERSUS

         NITYANANDA PATHAK AND 3 ORS.
         S/O- LATE ADITYA PATHAK, R/O- CHENGA, NAPARA, P.S. TARABARI, DIST.-
         BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781305.

         2:BHABANANDA PATHAK
          S/O- LATE ADITYA PATHAK
          R/O- CHENGA
          NAPARA
          P.S. TARABARI
          DIST.- BARPETA
         ASSAM
          PIN- 781305.

         3:KHARGESWAR PATHAK
          S/O- LATE ADITYA PATHAK
          R/O- CHENGA
          NAPARA
          P.S. TARABARI
          DIST.- BARPETA
         ASSAM
          PIN- 781305.

         4:DEEPMANI PATHAK
          S/O- LATE ADITYA PATHAK
          R/O- CHENGA
          NAPARA
          P.S. TARABARI
          DIST.- BARPETA
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3

             ASSAM
             PIN- 781305

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A GOYAL
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. DILIP DEY

                                  BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

                                        ORDER

09-05-2022

Mr. A. Goyal, learned counsel represents the appellant. Mr. D. Dey, learned counsel represents the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, read with Section 151 of the CPC, against the judgment and order, dated 30-10-2019, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, in Misc. G.C. (FC) Case No. 06/2017, rejecting the prayer made under Sections 10/25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for appointing him as guardian of his two minor sons, namely, Sri Ankur Pathak and Mrinmoy Pathak.

The wife of the appellant and the mother of the aforesaid two minor children died and, therefore, the appellant/father wants to be the guardian of the said two minor children.

The learned counsel for both the parties have submitted that the respondents have no objection if the minor children are put in the custody of their father, i.e., the appellant in this appeal, as guardian and to that effect, the affidavit, dated 18-04-2022, has been filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. On perusal of the affidavit, it is found that admittedly the appellant is the natural guardian of the minor children, named above, being their father. It has also been stated in the affidavit that one of the minor children, i.e., Ankur Page No.# 3/3

Pathak is 43% disable.

The respondents have no objection as stated in the affidavit; rather, they are in agreement in putting the minor children in custody of their father. Since both the children are minor and their mother is also not alive, in the considered view of this Court and as agreed to by the respondents, the best interest of both the child would be served if they are put in the custody of their father, i.e., the appellant herein.

In view of above, this appeal stands disposed of with direction to the respondent to handover the custody of the minor children to their father/natural guardian, as agreed.

The children shall be produced in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, who shall, in turn, allow them to be taken in the custody of their father in terms of this order.

Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, on 17-05-2022 with copy of this order. With the above observations and direction this appeal stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant