Skip to content


Fao No. 192 of 1998 (Oandm) Vs. General Public …..Respondent. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Fao No. 192 of 1998 (Oandm)

Respondent

General Public …..Respondent.

Excerpt:


.....navita singh present: none. s.s.saron, j. smt. bhagwanti – appellant filed a petition under section 8 of the hindu minority and guardianship act, 1956 (act – for short) seeking permission on behalf of sandeep kumar and nitin kumar, her minor sons, to sell the property owned by them measuring 1 kanal 15 marlas, as detailed in para 3 of the petition. the appellant wanted to sell the share of the minors in order to provide them good education, food and other daily necessities on the ground that she had no other source of income and that sandeep kumar was studying in 8th class while nitin kumar was studying in 7th class. the learned additional district judge, kurukshetra, vide impugned order dated 09.12.1997, held that there seemed to be no benefit of the minors in selling the land owned by them. the basic idea to get permission to dispose of the land was for the livelihood and for day to day expenses. it was observed that the appellant had not been able to show whether she did not have any other property for the maintenance of the children. in the circumstances, no ground was found to grant permission to the appellant to sell the share of the minors namely sandeep kumar.....

Judgment:


(310) FAO No.192 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIARH FAO No.192 of 1998 (O&M) Date of decision: 30.06.2014.

Smt.

Bhagwanti ……Appellant.

Versus General Public …..Respondent.

CORAM: HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SARON HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE NAVITA SINGH Present: None.

S.S.SARON, J.

Smt.

Bhagwanti – appellant filed a petition under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (Act – for short) seeking permission on behalf of Sandeep Kumar and Nitin Kumar, her minor sons, to sell the property owned by them measuring 1 kanal 15 marlas, as detailed in para 3 of the petition.

The appellant wanted to sell the share of the minors in order to provide them good education, food and other daily necessities on the ground that she had no other source of income and that Sandeep Kumar was studying in 8th class while Nitin Kumar was studying in 7th class.

The learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, vide impugned order dated 09.12.1997, held that there seemed to be no benefit of the minors in selling the land owned by them.

The basic idea to get permission to dispose of the land was for the livelihood and for day to day expenses.

It was observed that the appellant had not been able to show whether she did not have any other property for the maintenance of the children.

In the circumstances, no ground was found to grant permission to the appellant to sell the share of the minors namely Sandeep Kumar and Malik Ramesh 2014.07.02 11:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh (310) FAO No.192 of 1998 -2- Nitin Kumar.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Aggrieved against the same, the appellant filed the present appeal, in which notice of motion was issued on 18.03.1998 for 20.07.1998.

No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

Even otherwise, both the minors have now admittedly attained the age of majority and, therefore, it is for them to decide as to whether they want to sell the land in question.

In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed in default.

(S.S.SARON) JUDGE (NAVITA SINGH) JUDGE3006.2014 Ramesh Malik Ramesh 2014.07.02 11:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //