Skip to content


Musammat Sudhia Vs. Makka - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1919All49(2); 54Ind.Cas.418
AppellantMusammat Sudhia
RespondentMakka
Excerpt:
guardians and wards act (viii of 1890) sections 7, 17 - minor living with mother--guardian, whether should be appointed--welfare of minor. - - we, therefore, think that the order of the court below is not based on good grounds......of the minor to be guardian in spite of the objection made by the appellant, who is the minor's mother. the minor is now said to be 9 or 10 years of age. the parties are mahammadans. the property of the family consists of two buffaloes in which the mother and the other children also have shares. in the course of the proceedings the respondent, the applicant for the guardianship, stated that he did not wish to handle the property and that it might be left with the mother. the sole' ground upon which he applied to be made guardian of this minor was that the mother's brother was denying his right to be guardian. the object, therefore, of his application is not the welfare' of the minor but the vindication of his own rights to be a guardian. the minor's father died six years ago......
Judgment:

1. This is an appeal from an order passed by the Court below appointing the grandfather of the minor to be guardian in spite of the objection made by the appellant, who is the minor's mother. The minor is now said to be 9 or 10 years of age. The parties are Mahammadans. The property of the family consists of two buffaloes in which the mother and the other children also have shares. In the course of the proceedings the respondent, the applicant for the guardianship, stated that he did not wish to handle the property and that it might be left with the mother. The sole' ground upon which he applied to be made guardian of this minor was that the mother's brother was denying his right to be guardian. The object, therefore, of his application is not the welfare' of the minor but the vindication of his own rights to be a guardian. The minor's father died six years ago. The minor arrived at the age of seven years some three years ago. It is an admitted fact that the mother has always taken care of her children. The respondent Makka, the grandfather, has not taken any steps to benefit the minor all these years. Admittedly there are two religious factions in this caste : the mother belongs to one, while the respondent belongs to the other. It appears to us that this is probably the cause of the application. We cannot see that it is for the benefit and welfare of the minor that a child of his years should be taken from his mother against whose character no allegations whatsoever have been made. The circumstances are such that in our opinion there is no necessity whatsoever to appoint any guardian. The mother is quite capable of looking after her own children. We, therefore, think that the order of the Court below is not based on good grounds. We allow the appeal and set aside the order of the Court below. There is no necessity whatsoever in the present ease for the appointment of any guardian. The appellant will have her costs from the respondent in both Courts.


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