IMPORTANT POINT
The duty of the court to protect the interests of a minor in a legal proceeding, including appointing a guardian when the existing guardian is not fulfilling their duty.

JUDGMENT

A.V.RAVINDRA BABU,J. - Challenging the judgment, dtd. 24/4/2017, in Original Suit No.321 of 2011, on the file of the Court of III Additional District Judge, Guntur (for short, "the learned Additional District Judge"), the appellant by name Gudapati Venkata Seshu Supriya, Daughter of Murali Krishna, aged about 10 years as on the date of Appeal, who was the minor defendant in the above said Suit, filed the present Appeal.

2. The parties to this Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience.

3. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, according to the averments in the plaint, is that the plaintiff filed the Suit to declare that the sale deed, dtd. 19/7/2011, bearing registered No.6033/2011 on the file of Sub-Registrar Office, Nallapadu is illegal, null and void. The plaintiff is the father of Gudapati Murali Krishna and paternal grandfather of the minor i.e., defendant Gudapati Venkata Seshu Supriya. The plaintiff had two sons Murali Krishna and Sai Babu and two daughters Patibandla Vijaya Lakshmi and V. Santha Kumari. The said Santha Kumari died about 12 years back and the plaintiff"s wife also died about 10 years back. The plaintiff worked in APSRTC and out of his personal earnings, he purchased the house site under a registered sale deed, dtd. 26/7/1978, from Goli Sambasiva Rao and thereafter he constructed a house in the said property and the Municipal authorities allotted Dr.No.2-4- 28 and the said property is described as schedule property.

(i) The plaintiff sold his joint family property in an extent of Ac.1.19 cents of land in D.Nos.335 and 331 of Pedapalakaluru Village to one Ramineni Srinivasa Rao and another for a consideration of Rs.1,15,00,000.00 and received advance amount of Rs.40,00,000.00 and out of love and affection, the plaintiff has paid an amount of Rs.15,00,000.00 each to his sons Murali Krishna and Sai Babu and retained only Rs.10,00,000.00. The vendee failed to make the payment of balance sale consideration and he filed O.S. No.240 of 2009 on the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Guntur for refund of the advance amount. Later, the vendor approached through one Gudapati Ramesh to sell the property of Ac.1.19 cents at Rs.1,20,00,000.00 per acre. But the purchaser insisted registration of the property by the plaintiff along with his two sons. So, the plaintiff informed his sons that the share of the deceased daughter has to be distributed among himself and his two sons and his existing daughter Patibandla Vijaya Lakshmi as per Hindu law. But his two sons refused to allot any share to the daughters of the plaintiff and further insisted that the joint family property has to be distributed in three equal shares among them and thereby the plaintiff was constrained to accept for the same. While things stood thus, the vendee of the said property paid an amount of Rs.60,00,000.00 to one Gudapati Rama Rao, resident of Paladugu. The plaintiff insisted upon 1/3rd share of the amount paid by the vendee. Then the mediators promised to distribute the amount among the plaintiff and his sons equally and paid an amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 out of Rs.60,00,000.00 to the plaintiff duly promising that the balance Rs.10,00,000.00 has to be paid along with the share of the sale consideration at the time of registration. They further informed the plaintiff that their sons may not co-operate for registration of the property in case the total consideration was shared and paid prior to registration of the property. Consequently, the plaintiff has accepted for their proposal and received Rs.10,00,000.00 and kept the same in State Bank of India and Andhra Bank by mentioning the name of his daughter Vijaya Lakshmi as nominee. Having come to know about the said nomination, the two sons of the plaintiff objected and insisted upon partition of the joint family properties. At the time of registration, the vendee paid the balance sale consideration and kept the sam