Petitioners: 1 . (Appiicants) -Versus Respondent: 1 . ‘ (Non-applicants) \3 : Division Bench: - Hon’ble Shri L.C. Bhadoo a T Hon’ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J 25-9-2007:- Shri PR. Patankar, couhsel fi Shri U.K.S.‘ Chandei, counsel Niranjan Singh Huda, S/o Late Shri Jivan Singh Huda, aged about 65 years, R/o 14, . Shakun Nagar, Anand Nagar, Khandwa', (MP) ‘ Mrs. Kamaijit Huda, W/o Niranjan Singh Huda, W/o Niranjan Singh Huda, aged about 58 years, R/o 14, Shakun Nagar, Anand Nagar, Khandwa, (MP) Tavinderpai $ingh, Slo Late Harvansh Singh Bhatia. Aged about 34 years, R10 Hazi Chaal, Tikrapara Chowk, Dayaibandh, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) Smt. Manjit Kaur, W/o Pritam Singh Sahgal, aged about 46 years; Rlo Gondpara Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) Primm Singh Sahgal, W/o Shri Balwant Singh Sahgai, aged About 51 years; R/o Gond Para, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) J. 1r the appellants. for the. respondent No.1 . GRPRJ ~ FS/246ri 2/2007 ~- 50,1 mm (W), WWW WW wW %a1‘1%msn%:1 }-k Heard learned counse! for the parties. We have perused impugneui order dated 4-4-2007 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilas Jur in Case No.247-A/2005 (Niranjan Singh Huda & another V. Tavinder F’al Singh & others) whereby learned Judge has declined to entertain the case on the ground that the Family Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the case & same has to be heard by the 1“ Additional District Judge to orn District Judge has given power by distribution memo to hear the tters concerning Guardian & Wards Act cases. Learned Judge has als placed reliance on the decisions of two cases rendered by one Mad‘ya Pradesh High Court {Gulab V. Madhya Pradesh 2000 (2) M P L J 434} and another by Andhra Pradesh Hlgh Court {R Durga Prasad V Bh rat Sangh AIR 1998 Andhra Pradesh 290} Having heard learned coun el for the parties, we have perused provisions of clause (g) of sub-S tion (1) of Section 7 of the'Family Courts Act, 1984. Section 7 (1)(a) nvisages that Family Court shall have and exercise all the jurisdiction ex rcisable by any district court or any subordinate civil court under any la for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of the natu e referred to in the Explanation: Explanationz- The suits and procee ings referred to in this sub-section are suits and proceedings of the followi g nature, namely:- GRPRJ FS/246a h a WW,W,W WT W 200 Perusa! of the above provision clearly shows that the matters Guardian and Wards Act are to be arising under Sections 7 and 10 of heard by the Judge of the Family C urt. The Family Court at Bilaspur has been established under the pro sions of Family 'Courts Act, 1984, therefore, learned Principal Judge, Bilaspur, has jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed by the appellants erein under Section 7 and 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act. that the District and Sessions Judge ditional Sessions Judge will have tions 7 and 10 of the Guardian and Learned Judge has mentio has passed order that the 1‘s‘ jurisdiction to hear matters under Wards Act, 1890. We fail to understand how th District Judge can pass order against the provisions of the Act when the ily Court specially authorizes Judge of the Family Court to entertain a suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor. Therefore, order impugned passed y the learned Judge, Family Court, is patently illegali The judgments pon which Judge of the Family Court has relied upon are not relevant at Il in this case. Therefore, in view of rthe above, order impugned cannot be sustained, same is liable to‘bé aside and it is set aside. Learned GRPRJ s FS/246vs Z/ZOiw‘qalul). e d c n m s straw m (W) m arr faste- amm aorta: martWm miatha waif a fsqtW s aim was Xxx xxx xxx Xxx xxx xxx (g) a suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor. Wm (W) mwa Wwm WW§§€IW *aimm Judge, Family Court is directed to t the same as per the order of this Ct 22-1 -2007. Parties are directed to a on‘S‘“ October, 2007. Registry is immediateiy to the Famiiy Court for complianoe. The appeal is disposed of acc ordingiy. Sd/- , L.C.Bhadoo Judge ake up & hear the matter & expedite hm passed in WP. No.6996/2006 on ppear before the Judge, Family Court directed to send copy of this order ///I 1 ‘ , , i sm- . V Suni\ Kuma‘" smha Judge W m........u..................n.“u.........u......7.‘...“i 200 GRPRJ —» rS/246 moot; 50,uoo. iV