Skip to content


Venkayya Vs. Venkata Narasimhulu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1898)8MLJ112
AppellantVenkayya
RespondentVenkata Narasimhulu
Excerpt:
- .....the duty of the court to have enquired under section 7 as to the necessity for appointing a guardian, and, if necessary, to have appointed a lit and proper person. in making such appointment, he might very properly take into consideration the wishes of the mother expressed in any genuine will.2. we must, therefore, set aside the order of the district judge and direct him to restore the petition to his file and to dispose of it according to law. costs will abide and follow the result.
Judgment:

1. Assuming that the will in this case is genuine (a question, however, which has not been tried), the appointment by it of a guardian cannot be held to be such an appointment as comes within Section 7, Clause 3 of the Guardian and Wards Act; for, a Hindu mother has no authority to make such appointment by will. It was, therefore, the duty of the Court to have enquired under Section 7 as to the necessity for appointing a guardian, and, if necessary, to have appointed a lit and proper person. In making such appointment, he might very properly take into consideration the wishes of the mother expressed in any genuine will.

2. We must, therefore, set aside the order of the District Judge and direct him to restore the petition to his file and to dispose of it according to law. Costs will abide and follow the result.


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