Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein filed First Appeal No.
501 of 2007 whereby the High Court reversed the judgment and order dated 16.04.2007 passed by the District Judge, Yavatmal, Maharashtra.
10 of 2003 for appointing him as guardian of the minor Vishwajeet.
The District Judge by a companymon judgment dated 16.04.2007 in both the proceedings, allowed the application filed by the appellant herein and appointed him as a Guardian of Vishwajeet till he attains the age of 12 years and directed him to deposit the amounts inheritable by the minor due to the demise of his mother, in any Nationalized Bank in Fixed deposit in the name of minor, which may be renewed from time to time till he attains majority and also directed that numberody can withdraw the principal or interest amount without prior permission of the Court.
Brief facts On 03.06.2002, the marriage of the respondent was solemnized with Kaveri, the daughter of the appellant herein.
Vishwajeet is residing with the appellant maternal grandfather and his family since his birth.
501 of 2007 in the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur.
Heard Mr. Anantbhushan Kanade, learned senior companynsel for the appellant and Ms. Anagha S. Desai, learned companynsel for the respondent.
On 17.10.2007, the learned single Judge of the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein and directed the appellant herein to hand over the custody of the child to the respondent.
12 of 2003 for the custody of his son.
On 07.08.2003, the appellant maternal grandfather of the minor filed an application in the Court of District Judge II, Yavatmal, Maharashtra under Section 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 hereinafter referred to as Act 1890 being M.J.C. No.
After giving birth to son, on the same day, the respondents wife died due to excessive bleeding.
Challenging the said order, the appellant has preferred this appeal by way of special leave petition before this Court.
The application filed by the respondent was dismissed by the District Judge with the liberty to file such application after companypletion of the age of 12 years by the minor.
Out of the said wedlock, on 23.03.2003, a son, namely, Vishwajeet Sangharsh was born.
After the death of his wife, the respondent companytracted second marriage and also has a son from the second marriage.
The District Judge further directed the newly appointed guardian to allow the respondent father to meet the minor once in a month.
The said application was opposed by the respondent and, on 15.10.2003, he also filed an application under Section 25 of the Act 1890 being M.J.C. No.
Sathasivam, J. This appeal, pertaining to the custody of a minor child, is directed against the final judgment and order dated 17.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in First appeal No.
