SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(Cal) 121

A.K.DAS, AMRESH ROY
RABINDRA NATH MUKHERJEE – Appellant
Versus
ABINASH CHANDRA CHATTERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.N.LAHIRI, SAKTI PRASAD MUKHERJI

AMRESH ROY, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred under Section 47 of Guardians and Wards Act by Rabindra Nath Mukherjee against an order made under Section 7 of that Act rejecting his prayer to be appointed guardian of the person and property of minor Gautam Chatterjee who is his daughter's son. The parents of the minor are alive. Father of the boy who was joined as opposite party in the petition and is Respondent in this Court opposed the prayer of the petitioner appellant.

( 2 ) THE parties are governed by Dayabhag Hindu Law, and under that law undisputably father is the natural guardian of the person and property of minor son. That law still prevails under Section 12 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. Appellant's claim to be appointed guardian in preference to the father of the boy who by their personal law is the natural guardian of the person and property of the minor is based on the history of the boy's life who is now about 12 years old, being born in 1959.

( 3 ) IT is the admitted case of both parties that soon after the boy was born, he was brought to the house of his maternal grandfather and was brought up there and has been living there. Reason for that

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top