1963 Supreme(Mad) 36
VEERASWAMI
V. N. Swaminathan – Appellant
Versus
Angayarkanni Ammal and others – Respondent
Advocates Appeared:
Advocate General and R.G. Rajan, for Petitioner; M.M. Ismail and P. Ramaswami, for Respondents.
Judgement Key Points
- The petitioner, born on 25th June 1944, claimed to have attained majority upon completing 18 years on 25th June 1962 and sought discharge of court-appointed joint personal guardians under Section 41(1)(c) of the Guardians and Wards Act. (!) (!)
- A court-appointed guardian of the person of a minor under the Indian Majority Act, 1875, Section 3, continues until the minor completes 21 years of age, notwithstanding other enactments. [21000751430001]
- The Guardians and Wards Act defines a "minor" by reference to the Indian Majority Act, 1875, and Section 41(1)(c) provides that a guardian's powers cease when the ward ceases to be a minor. [21000751430004]
- The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, Section 4(a), defines a minor as a person who has not completed 18 years, but this definition applies only for the purposes of that Act. [21000751430004] (!) (!)
- Section 2 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act states that its provisions are in addition to, and not in derogation of, the Guardians and Wards Act, unless expressly provided otherwise. (!) (!)
- Section 5(b) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act overrides other laws only to the extent of inconsistency; the definition of minor under Section 4(a) does not override the Indian Majority Act, Section 3, for cases involving court-appointed guardians of the person. (!) (!) (!) (!) [21000751430002]
- The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act supplements the Guardians and Wards Act and does not provide for court appointments of guardians; court guardians are governed by the Guardians and Wards Act and Indian Majority Act. (!) (!)
- There is no inconsistency between Section 4(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and the provision in Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act extending minority to 21 years for court-appointed personal guardians. (!) (!) (!) [21000751430002]
- The purpose of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act is to replace Hindu personal law on minority but not to supersede provisions for court-appointed guardians under the Guardians and Wards Act. (!) (!) [21000751430002]
- The petition to discharge guardians upon attaining 18 years was dismissed, as the petitioner remains a minor until 21 years under the applicable provisions. (!) [21000751430003] (!)
Judgement
ORDER :- In my opinion, this petition cannot be ordered. The petitioner is the only son of V. Nadimuthu Pillai, who died on 26th October 1954. The petitioners date of birth is stated to be 25th June 1944 and he is said to have completed 18 years of age as on 25th June 1962. On O. P. Nos. 323 and 35 of 1955, on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Tanjore, the first respondent was appointed as his personal guardian. But on appeal this Court in C. M. A. No. 14 etc., of 1956, by a consent order, appointed the first two respondents as joint personal guardians of the petitioner. It appears further from the affidavit filed in support of this petition that the petitioner has been residing in the family house at Tanjore with his grandmother and is now studying in the B. A. class in the Rajah Serfoji College, Tanjore. He says that he took charge of his estate on 16th September 1962 from the third respondent, who was appointed as executor by his father in his will dated 9th September 1952, which was duly probated in O. P. No. 31 of 1957 on the file of this Court.
Since he took over the estate, the petitioner, according to him, has appointed the third respondent as his gene
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
