JUDGMENT

Tek Chand, J. - This is an appeal by Mt. Sakina Begam against the order of the Senior Subordinate Judge of Kangra, appointing the respondent Raja Muhammad Wali Ullah Khan as the guardian of the property of her son Farrakh Muhammad minor, aged nine years The proceedings which led to the appointment of the respondent as guardian are not described in the order under appeal. It is, therefore, necessary to give them in some detail in this judgment.

2. It appears that one Faiz Muhammad Khan of Rehlu died about eight years ago, leaving him surviving his widow Mt. Sakina Begam, appellant, and a minor son Farrakh Muhammad who was then about one year old. His property consisted of two squares of land in the Lyallpur District and some immovable property in the Kangra District, to which the minor succeeded. On 12th October 1926, Ali Muhammad, who was a first cousin of Faiz Muhammad Khan deceased applied to be appointed as the guardian of the property of the minor. It was alleged that the mother of the minor had not been managing the property satisfactorily. The mother opposed the application and contended that she had been managing the property in the best interests of the minor.

3. An issue was framed as to whether it was necessary to appoint a guardian at all, and, if so, whether the applicant Ali Muhammad was a fit person to be so appointed. Ali Muhammad, however, led no evidence to prove this issue but Mt. Sakina Begam produced two witnesses. On 21st December 1926, the learned Senior Subordinate Judge instead of proceeding to adjudicate upon the application of Ali Muhammad sent a robkar to Raja Muhammad Wali Ullah Khan, respondent, Honorary Magistrate, Rehlu, who is an uncle of the deceased father of the minor, asking him to make suggestions for the protection of the property of the minor. No reply having been received from the Raja a reminder was sent to him. On 21st February, the Raja replied saying that the lands of the minor were not being properly managed, that it was necessary to appoint a guardian for the protection of his property and that he was prepared to assist in the management of the estate if a "paid guardian" was appointed. He suggested that one Munir Ullah Khan was a fit person to be appointed the "paid guardian" on Rs. 15 per mensem. This reply was laid before the Court on 7th March 1927.

4. In the meantime the original applicant Ali Muhammad had died on 4th February 1927, and no application had been made either by Raja Muhammad Wali Ullah Khan or by any other person to be substituted on the record in his place with a view to continue the proceedings started at his instance. On 7th March, neither Raja Muhammad Wali Ullah Khan nor any agent on his behalf was present but the Court, on reading the reply received from him to the robkar sent by it, proceeded to appoint the Raja as guardian of the property of the minor. In the order it was stated that it was not necessary to take any security from the guardian, and that he could entertain a paid manager on a suitable salary.

5. Against this order the present appeal has been preferred by Mt. Sakina Begam and various objections have been taken on her behalf against the appointment of the respondent. The first point to be considered is whether the application made by Ali Muhammad for appointment as guardian of the property of the minor had or had not abated on the date that the order under appeal was passed.

6. As already pointed out, Ali Muham mad had died on 4th February 1927, and no application had been made to substitute any other person in his place. Mr. Muhammad Tufail for the appellant urges that the proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act are personal to the applicant and on his death the "right to sue" does not survive and the Court has no power to proceed with that application any further, But that it is open to any other person to apply for his own appointment as guardian on a fresh application. Mr. Niaz Muhammad for the respondent contends, on the other h