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

2003 Supreme(All) 601

M.P.SINGH, S.P.SRIVASTAVA
JAGDISH CHANDRA GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
VIMLA GUPTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L.Maurya, V.D.Chauhan

S. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant, who had not been impleaded as a party - respondent in a proceeding initiated by Dr. Kumari Vimla Gupta - the present respondent, for her being appointed as guardian of the person and property of Km. Sweta Gupta - the minor, has filed this appeal under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 feeling aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, appointing the respondent in this appeal as guardian of the person and property of minor - Km. Sweta Gupta with certain directions.

( 2 ) SINCE the appellant had neither been impleaded in the proceeding giving rise to this appeal nor, as asserted by him, he had any notice of the same, an application seeking grant of leave to file the appeal being Civil Misc. Application No. 91483 of 2002 had been moved by him. The said application had been allowed after hearing the learned counsel for the parties vide the order dated 23-5-2002.

( 3 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondent.

( 4 ) PURSUANT to the notice issued by this Court vide the order dated 25-2-2003 Dr. Kumari Vimla Gupta - the responden

























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