Karnataka High Court
Manumala Prabhudas S/O Late Yesaiah vs Smt. M Rani W/O Manumala Prabhudas on 14 February, 2025
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3042-DB
MFA No. 105924 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 105924 OF 2024 (GW)
BETWEEN:
MANUMALA PRABHUDAS S/O LATE YESAIAH
AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. GOVERNMENT OF SERVICE,
R/O. BASEMENT, HOUSE NO. 317,
JANTA COLONY, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ROHIT L. SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. M. RANI W/O MANUMALA PRABHUDAS
AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
C/O. SUVARTHAMMA W/O LATE PALLE ESAIAH,
HOUSE NO.444, HANUMANGALLI,
RAMANAGAR, TQ. JOIDA, DIST. KARWAR-591301.
...RESPONDENT
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED)
Digitally signed
by VISHAL
NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.47 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS
Location: High
Court of
ACT R/W SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING
Karnataka,
Dharwad
Bench
TO, ALLOW THIS APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
08.11.2023, PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT, HUBBALLI IN G & W NO.1/2021 AND THE SAID CASE
MAY KINDLY BE ORDERED TO BE RESTORED ON THE FILE
OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3042-DB
MFA No. 105924 of 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
This appeal is by the father of children, Ms.
Prerana and Ms. Prashaunsa [hereafter referred to as, 'the
minors]. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated
08.11.2023 in G & WC No.1/2021 on the file of the Family
Court Judge, Hubballi [for short, 'the Family Court']. The
Family Court, by this impugned order dated 08.11.2023, has
dismissed the appellant's application under Section 25 of
the Guardians and Wards Act., 1890 [G & WC Act] on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction citing Section 9 thereof.
2. The undisputed facts are that the appellant
and the respondent are the parents of the minors, and the
appellant has filed his application under Section 25 of the G
& WC Act in No.1/2021 for the custody of the minors. The
Family Court has disposed of this application by its order
19.02.2022 granting custody of the elder minor to the
appellant along with visiting rights to the younger minor.
The Family Court has also granted visiting rights to the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3042-DB
respondent to meet the elder minor. The Family Court's
order dated 19.02.2022 is carried in appeal before this Court
in M.F.A. No.101930/2022, which is disposed of by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court on 15.09.2023 restoring the
proceedings to the Family Court with liberty to the parties to
lead evidence.
3. The appellant and the respondent have led
evidence in terms of the liberty granted, and the Family
Court has examined the question of its jurisdiction to
entertain the application in the light of the provisions of
Section 9 of the G & WC Act and the unimpeachable
evidence on record that [a] the minors are born in hospitals
at Hubballi on 30.08.2009 and 25.11.2013 respectively, [b]
the respondent has left the matrimonial home in Hubballi in
the month of April 2018 along with her minor to reside with
her parents in Ramnagar, Joida Taluk, Karwar District, [c]
the respondent has admitted these minors at Mount Carmel
CBSE School, Ramnagar, Joida Taluk, Karwar in the year
2018-19 and the minors have continued studying in the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3042-DB
same school, [d] the respondent's parents have been
residents of Ramnagar, Joida Taluk, Karwar.
4. The Family Court has opined that these
facts and circumstances demonstrate that the minors also
ordinarily reside in Ramnagar, Joida Taluk, Karwar and an
application for custody and visiting rights must necessarily
be examined by the Court within whose jurisdiction the
minors ordinarily reside in view of the provisions of Section
9 of the G & WC Act. At this stage, this Court refer to the
decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Abraham
G. Karimpanal v. Nil1, while considering the import of the
expression ordinarily resides in Section 9 of the G & WC Act
in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Jeewanti
Pandey v. Kishan Chandra Pandey2 has stated thus:
The principles stated above and the case law noticed
would not leave us in doubt that while determining the
jurisdiction of a Court to entertain the application under
Section 7 of the Act on the ground of residence, what is
material is actual residence of the minor at the
commencement of the proceedings and not a legal or
1 ILR 2004 Kar. 1840
2 (1981) 4 SCC 517
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3042-DB
constructive residence of such minor unless where an
artificial residence is created with bad faith.
5. This Court, when the established
circumstances are considered in the light of the provisions of
Section 9 of the G & WC Act and the afore exposition, is not
persuaded to opine that there is any irregularity in the
Family Court's impugned order that will justify interference.
Therefore, the appeal, subject to all just exceptions, stands
disposed of without interfering with the Family Court's view
on its jurisdiction.
No costs.
Sd/-
(B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR)
JUDGE
RSH, CT:VP
