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

1956 Supreme(Cal) 170

P.N.MUKHERJEE, GUHA RAY
MULUKH RAJ SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
DHANABANTA DEBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BALAI CHANDRA ROY, CHANDRA NARAYAN LAIK, HARIDAS CHATTERJEE, PABITRA BANERJI, PANCHANAN PAL

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) ON the 12th March 1954, opposite party No. 1 Dhanabanta Debi applied before the District Judge, Howrah, for being appointed guardian of the person and property of her minor sons Syamser Sarma, Biswanath Sarma, Srinath Sarma and Sewbachan Sarma. In her said application, the opposite party No. 1 alleged inter alia that the said minors were her sons by her deceased husband Pandit Shanta Ram sarma and wore living with her under her care and in her custody, that they were owners in possession of holding No. 02 Sanatan Mistry Lane, Salkia, and that their debts amounted to Rs. 3,200/ -. The application, however, did not contain any very specific relevant statement as to why it was necessary to appoint a guardian of the property of the minors. This defect appears to have been cured by subsequent applications, from which it appears that the minors' only source of maintenance was the income from the tenants of the said property and there was difficulty in the matter of realisation of rents from those tenants. The only near relative, mentioned in the guardianship application, was the minor's mother, the applicant herself.

( 2 ) AFTER issue of general citation, obje







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