In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... F.A.O. No.498 of 1988 ..... Date of decision:July 29, 2011 Indraj Singh .....Appellant v. Smt. Raj Wati .....Respondent .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL ..... 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ...... Present: None for the appellant. None for the respondent. ..... Mohinder Pal, J. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 18.2.1988 passed by the learned Senior Sub Judge, Faridabad, whereby the petition filed by appellant Indraj Singh under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (for short `the Act') for custody of the minor child Master Sanjay, who was born on 3.8.1980 out of the wedlock between the appellant and respondent, was dismissed. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent had F.A.O. No.498 of 1988 [2] taken place in 5.7.1974. It is the case of the appellant that the respondent left her matrimonial home along with the minor child and he was paying `200/- per month as maintenance allowance to the child as per orders of the then C.J.M., Faridabad. The appeal filed by the appellant was admitted on 23.6.1988. During the pendency of the appeal in this Court, the minor child, the custody of which has been sought by the appellant, has become major and this appeal has rendered infructuous and that was the reason that no one was present on behalf of the parties to pursue this case. Otherwise also, the paramount consideration with regard to the custody of a minor child is his welfare and it is in the best interest of the child that his custody is provided to his mother. A mother always has to think twice, once for herself and once for her child. The tie which links mother and child is of such pure and immaculate strength as to never weaken. Home for a child is that where her mother lives. A mother's live for her child is like nothing else in the world. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the paramount consideration with regard to the custody of the minor child is his welfare, as also the fact that the minor child has become major during the pendency of this appeal in this Court, the appeal filed by the appellant has rendered infructuous. Resultantly, the same is dismissed as having become infructuous. F.A.O. No.498 of 1988 [3] July 29, 2011. (Mohinder Pal) Judge *hsp*