- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1466 OF 2025 (GW) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAKSHMINARASAMMA W/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. MANU.H., S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT ARASAPURA VILLAGE (AT AND POST), HOLAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V JAVAHAR BABU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. BHARATHKUMAR. V. K. S/O LATE. KRISHNAPPA V.S., AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT SOMPURA VILLAGE, HOLAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK. 2. SRI. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, S/O LATE. NARASIMHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT GOWDETI VILLAGE, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 VIRUPASANDRA PANCHAYATHI, GANGARAVARA HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK-561 202. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NARASIMHARAJU N L., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; NOTICE SERVED ON R-2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47(a) OF GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED ON G AND WC NO.26/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU SITTING AT MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE PETITIONER FILED U/S 7 AND 10 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT 1890. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) Sri. V Javahar Babu and Sri. S Kumar, the learned counsels for the appellant and the first respondent respectively, are heard for disposal of the appeal. The District and Sessions Judge has allowed the first respondent’s petition with a direction to the appellants [the maternal grandmother and uncle] to hand over the custody of the minor child [Ms. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 Danvika V.B] to the first respondent, who is her father. 2. In brief, the circumstances leading to the present petition are that the mother [the first respondent's wife] has committed suicide resulting in a dispute between the first respondent and the appellants over the custody of a minor child. The maternal grandfather [the second respondent] is also a party to the present proceedings, but he has not participated in the proceedings and in fact, he has not joined the appellants in filing the appeal. The material circumstances are that, there is no proof of actual income of either of the appellants, and the first respondent is an outsourced employee with the PWD Department, and he lives with his family members, including his mother, who is 60 years old and a married sister. This sister, who is living with the first respondent and his mother, is an Ayurvedic Doctor. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 The child is attending a Kindergarten which is 10 kilometers from the appellants' residence 3. If the first respondent's case is that he has to travel every day for 40 kilometers from his residence [in Koratagere] to pick the child from the appellants’ residence to take her to the Kindergarten and drop the child back, an assertion which is denied by the appellants. The appellants further contend that this Court must allow the minor to be with the appellants at least until she attains the age of 5 years and she is only 3 years old now and that she can grow with the grandmother for the next 2 years. 4. These rival contentions are considered in the light of the Family Court’s reasoning. This Court must observe that nothing is pointed out to disqualify the first respondent who is the natural guardian from having the custody of the minor girl when he has the assistance of his mother and a very qualified sister living with him. This Court must next observe that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 these are material circumstances as would be the assertion that the father will employ his resources for the child’s development, and in fact, his statement before this Court is that he shall admit the child in a Kindergarten at Koratagere and he will take the child to the appellants' residence at least once in 15 days and the appellants themselves could any day visit the child at his residence. 5. When all these circumstances are considered, this Court is of the view that there is no reason for interference with the impugned order and the appellants must hand over the custody of the child to the first respondent, who must take the child to the appellants' residence once in every 15 days, preferably on a Sunday and permit the appellants to visit the child otherwise at their convenience. The appeal is disposed of accordingly and the appellants are directed to handover the child to the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28729-DB MFA No. 1466 of 2025 first respondent on 01.08.2025. The pending applications also stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RKA