Supreme Court Allows Child to Study in School of His Choice: Nutan Gautam vs. Prakash Gautam (2019)

Date of the Judgment: April 5, 2019

Citation: 2019 INSC 312

Judges: R. Banumathi, J., R. Subhash Reddy, J.

Can a child’s preference for their school be a determining factor in custody disputes? The Supreme Court of India addressed this crucial question in a recent family law case. The Court considered whether a child should be compelled to attend a particular school and boarding house against their wishes, especially when they are comfortable and doing well in another school. This case highlights the paramount importance of a child’s welfare in custody matters.

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices R. Banumathi and R. Subhash Reddy, delivered the judgment, with Justice R. Subhash Reddy authoring the opinion.

Case Background

The case involves a dispute between Nutan Gautam (the appellant-wife) and Prakash Gautam (the respondent-husband). They married in 2006 and have a son, Krish, born in 2009. In 2012, the husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which was granted ex-parte. The Trial Court also directed that their son be admitted to Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School in New Delhi.

The wife appealed the ex-parte order at the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The child was admitted to the specified school and boarding house in New Delhi. An interim order allowed the husband to take the child to Delhi and leave him at the boarding house until the summer vacation. The mother was permitted to take the child during the summer vacation and return him to the boarding house before school reopened. The Family Court also ordered the husband to pay Rs. 10,000 per month to the wife as maintenance and directed her to choose one forum for receiving maintenance.

After the summer vacation, the child was unwilling to return to the boarding school in Delhi. He preferred to continue his studies at Global International School in Shahjanpur, where he had previously studied. The High Court granted the mother 15 days to comply with the order to send the child back to the boarding school.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The Trial Court granted an ex-parte divorce decree in favor of the husband and directed that the child be admitted to Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School in New Delhi. The wife appealed this order at the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The High Court issued interim orders regarding the child’s custody and schooling. The High Court initially directed the child to attend the school in Delhi, but the child’s reluctance to attend the school led to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

Legal Framework

The case primarily revolves around Section 13(1)(ia)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deals with grounds for divorce. However, the main legal issue concerns the welfare of the child and the court’s power to direct a child’s education. The court also considered the general principles of family law regarding child custody and the importance of a child’s wishes in such matters.

Section 13(1)(ia)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 states:

“13. Divorce.—(1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party—(ia) has, after the solemnization of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty; or (iii) has been incurably of unsound mind, or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.”

Arguments

Arguments of the Appellant (Wife):

• The child is very attached to his mother and is comfortable studying at Global International School in Shahjanpur.
• The child is not willing to study at Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School in New Delhi.
• The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration, and the child’s preference should be respected.
• The child is doing well in his studies at Global International School.

Arguments of the Respondent (Husband):

• The respondent is willing to enroll the child in the best school in Delhi, spending over Rs. 2,00,000 on fees.
• It is in the best interest and welfare of the child to study at Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School in New Delhi.
• The appellant-wife violated the High Court orders by not sending the child back to the boarding school after the summer vacation.
• The wish of the child is not the only criteria, and the welfare of the child is best served by admitting him in the school at New Delhi.

Submissions Table

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court considered the following issues:

1. Whether the child can be compelled to study in Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School, New Delhi, against his wishes.
2. Whether the High Court’s order directing the appellant-wife to elect one forum for maintenance is in accordance with the law.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Supreme Court did not cite any specific cases or books in its judgment. The court primarily relied on the principle of the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration in matters of child custody and education. The court also considered the child’s wishes, especially given his age and understanding.

Authorities Considered by the Court

Judgment

How each submission made by the Parties was treated by the Court?

How each authority was viewed by the Court?

The Court relied on the principle of the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration. The court also considered the child’s wishes, especially given his age and understanding. The court did not cite any specific cases or books.

The Supreme Court held that:

• The child cannot be compelled to study in Col. Satsangi’s Kiran Memorial Public School, New Delhi, against his wishes.
• The child’s welfare is paramount, and his desire to continue his studies at Global International School, Shahjanpur, should be respected.
• The High Court’s direction to the appellant-wife to elect one forum for maintenance is not in accordance with the law and is set aside.
• The respondent-husband is entitled to visitation rights.

The court observed that “it is natural, a boy of that age who has studied earlier in the school at Shahjanpur, willing to continue in the same school as much as he is acclimatised with the environment of such school where he has started his studies from Ist standard onwards.”

The court also noted that “the boy expressed his desire to continue his studies only in Shahjanpur school.”

The court further stated, “in the interest and welfare of of the child, Krish @ Master Krishav Gautam shall be allowed to continue his study at Global International School, Shahjanpur.”

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the child’s welfare and his expressed desire to continue his studies at Global International School in Shahjanpur. The Court recognized the child’s attachment to his mother and his comfort level with his current school environment. The Court emphasized that the child’s wishes should be considered, especially given his age and understanding. The Court also found that compelling the child to attend a boarding school against his will would not be in his best interest. The Court also found that the High Court’s direction to the appellant-wife to elect one forum for maintenance was not in accordance with the law.

Sentiment Analysis of Reasons Given by the Supreme Court

Fact:Law Ratio

Logical Reasoning

Key Takeaways

• The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in matters of child custody and education.
• A child’s wishes, especially when they are of a reasonable age and understanding, should be given due consideration.
• Courts should not compel a child to attend a specific school against their wishes, particularly when they are comfortable and doing well in another school.
• Orders regarding child custody and education should be made in the best interest of the child and not to satisfy the egos of the parents.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that:

• The child, Krish @ Master Krishav Gautam, shall be allowed to continue his study at Global International School, Shahjanpur.
• The respondent-husband is permitted to visit his child and take him from the appellant’s house on Sundays and public holidays between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
• The High Court is requested to dispose of the pending appeal expeditiously.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in matters of child custody and education. The Court also held that a child’s wishes, especially when they are of a reasonable age and understanding, should be given due consideration, and that courts should not compel a child to attend a specific school against their wishes, particularly when they are comfortable and doing well in another school. This case reinforces the principle that the child’s best interests should always be the primary focus in family law disputes.

Conclusion

In Nutan Gautam vs. Prakash Gautam, the Supreme Court emphasized the paramount importance of a child’s welfare and wishes in custody and education matters. The Court allowed the child to continue his studies in the school of his choice, reinforcing the principle that children’s voices should be heard and respected in decisions that affect their lives. This judgment serves as a reminder that the best interests of the child should always be the primary focus in family law disputes.