The Supreme Court in its order dated September 22, 2023 emphasised that child custody cases under the Guardians and Wards Act cannot be routinely transferred from one court to another without any specific reasons raised by either spouse.
The apex court rejected the plea filed by estranged wife/mother to transfer the matter from Chandigarh to Delhi.
“Both Of You Require Psychiatric Evaluation & Counselling”: Supreme Court To Warring Couple In Bitter Child Custody Battle
Case:
This is an ongoing child custody matter at Chandigarh between husband and wife, wherein, the petitioner wife approached the Supreme Court for transferring of proceedings instituted by the respondent-husband under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
The wife is working in Panchkula (Haryana) and living with the son at Chandigarh. A matrimonial case is also pending between her and her estranged husband at Delhi.
Delhi: Minor Boy Approaches Family Court For Monthly Maintenance From Working Mother Who Left Him Years Ago
However, in August 2023, the wife moved the top court for transferring the child custody matter out from Chandigarh, where it had been recorded that the petitioner-wife was residing in New Delhi and thus her plea was admitted by the Judge.
The husband appealed against this, due to the erroneous recording of the place of residence of the petitioner-wife. The husband also contested on the ground that Delhi would be over 250 kilometers away from the child’s current residence.
READ JUDGMENT | Best Interest Of Child Cannot Be Solely Based On Mother’s Love & Care: Bombay HC Grants Custody To Father
Supreme Court of India
Single Judge Justice Dipankar Datta verified the facts on record and upheld the interest of the child as paramount.
Dismissing the wife’s plea to transfer case out from Chandigarh to Delhi, the Supreme Court ordered:
Having bestowed serious consideration to the rival contentions, this Court is of the view that no order for transfer ought to be passed on mere assumptions and apprehensions of the parties.
As at present, Panchkula remains to be the place of office of the petitioner-wife and it is also not in dispute that Chandigarh is the place of her residence as well as that of the child.
The interest of the child being of paramount importance, at this stage, this Court finds no reason to grant the prayer for transfer. The Transfer Petition stands dismissed, without costs.
DO WATCH:
Hold Back Wife’s Salary Until She Hands Over Daughter’s Custody To Husband | Karnataka High Court
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW:
READ ORDER | Supreme Court Refuses Wife's Plea To Routinely Transfer Child Custody Case From One City To Another
— Voice For Men India (@voiceformenind) October 3, 2023
▪️Custody case in Chandigarh
▪️Wife working in Panchkula, living with son in Chandigarh
▪️Wanted to transfer case to Delhi#VoiceForMenhttps://t.co/Zm7zdxt5xB
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
If you find value in our work, you may choose to donate to Voice For Men Foundation via Milaap OR via UPI: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank (80G tax exemption applicable)
Follow Us
