In a landmark verdict, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court had cleared that a child's ordinary place of residence rather than the deemed custody of any parent is seen as a determining factor in assessing jurisdiction in child custody matters. Reiterating how merely even an assumption of deemed custody under a parent does not override the actual ordinary residence of the child at the time of making the determination, said the Court.This decision arises out of a battle over child custody, in which the mother with "deemed custody" of her minor child was trying to rely on her residence as a basis for jurisdiction, whereas the father argued that the child's ordinary residence is elsewhere and that jurisdiction should follow. The crux of the case revolved around the question of what is termed "ordinary residence" versus "deemed custody" in jurisdictional matters. The term "deemed custody" refers to a situation whereby one parent has the legal custody of the child, but this should not be necessarily interpreted to mean the child's place of residence or place of habitation. As deemed custodian, she argued that, in this particular case, jurisdiction should follow her place of residence. However, this contention was disapproved by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir with the view that the ordinary place where the child resides must take precedence. It would explain that within Indian law, issues of custody the welfare of the child is paramount, and this means the ordinary residence of the child should be a matter to which priority has been accorded in giving importance to the jurisdiction.The judgment further emphasized that in the family courts, the place where the child resides would form the basis for exercising jurisdiction and not necessarily on the legal arrangement of custody between the parents. This will, therefore, mark a very broad implication in cases involving custody and usually among the parents living in different geographical regions. It establishes the basis of supporting that the best interest of a child would always be associated with its habitual environment, thus the legal custody arrangements could not override the actual place of residence of the child in establishing jurisdiction. The Jammu & Kashmir High Court, having pegged its trend onto the child's ordinary residence, established that courts must take into consideration the practical sense of living a child has over the technical definition of custody. This ensures that the court best in the position of understanding the child or the parents' situation would have jurisdiction over the child's future. This judgment in itself will be a reminder that any judgment about the child's environment should be taken with extra caution as it sets clear judicial precedent in similar cases to come. 30k words limits Deep Search PDF Report No Ads Starting