Skip to content


Venkayya Garu Vs. Venkata Narasimhulu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1898)ILR21Mad401
AppellantVenkayya Garu
RespondentVenkata Narasimhulu
Excerpt:
guardians and wards act - act viii of 1890, sections 7, 8--testamentary appointment of a guardian. - .....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 fit 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 bean 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 Guardians 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 fit 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 //