HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K. JAISWAL C.M.A. No. 685 of 2008 DATE: 06.11.2014 Between:
Sardar Madan Singh .. Appellant and Master Angad Singh Sadana All Concerned .. Respondents JUDGMENT:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.K.Jaiswal) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 23.07.2007 passed in I.A.No. 1176 of 2007 in O.P.No.2254 of 2006 by the Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad whereby the petition filed by the 1st respondent herein – minor boy under Section 39 read with Section 41(4) of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 seeking to discharge the appellant from the guardianship of the minor and for cessation of the authority of the appellant to sell the property of the minor boy, was allowed.
The brief admitted facts of the case are that the 1st respondent herein is the minor boy who is represented by his mother. The appellant is the brother of the minor boy’s father. The mother filed O.P.No. 1553 of 2006 to appoint her as guardian for the minor boy and also over his estate and the same was allowed on 28.11.2006. Subsequently, the appellant filed O.P.No.2254 of 2006 seeking for his appointment as guardian for a particular piece of the property of the minor boy wherein the mother of the minor boy was not arrayed as a party, and the learned Chief Judge, by order dated 11.01.2007, allowed the petition permitting him to sell away the property at not less than Rs.19,00,000/- and deposit the sale proceeds thereof to the credit of the case. Subsequently, the minor boy filed I.A.No.1176 of 2007 seeking to discharge the appellant from the guardianship and for cessation of the authority of the appellant to sell the property of the minor boy, and the learned Chief Judge, by the impugned order, while taking into consideration the fact that the mother was already appointed as guardian, held that the 1st respondent cannot be appointed as guardian without notice to her, and allowed the application by nullifying the order dated 11.01.2007 in O.P.No. 2254 of 2006. Being aggrieved by the order dated 23.07.2007, the present appeal is filed.
Having carefully perused the order under appeal, we are of the opinion that the trial Court has given valid reason for discharging the appellant from acting as guardian for the minor boy and over his personal property and has rightly nullified the order dated 11.01.2007 passed in O.P.No.2254 of 2006. Hence, we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the appeal, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
G. CHANDRAIAH, J 06.11.2014 M.S.K. JAISWAL, J bcj