When considering an application to alienate a minor's property under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, the paramount consideration is the necessity or clear benefit to the minor. Judicial permission should be granted if the evidence shows the transaction is in the minor's best interest.

JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order passed in G.W.O.P.No.13 of 2022, dated 12.09.2024, on the file of the Principal District Court, Karur, dismissing the petition filed under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act.

2. The appellants are the petitioners and they being the parents of the minor C.Arul Vijay filed the petition under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act seeking permission to the petitioners to sell half share of the petition mentioned property belonging to their minor son.

3. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties will hereinafter be referred as per their status/ranking in their original suit.

4. The petitioners' case in brief is as follows:

The petitioners' minor son was born on 28.06.2011. The second petitioner – father for himself and on behalf of his minor son had purchased the petition mentioned property by virtue of a sale deed dated 15.02.2013 for a consideration of Rs.15,90,000/- and they had been in possession and enjoyment of the same. The second petitioner's brother Manickanathan had also purchased another portion of the property in the same and nearby survey fields and their properties are situated backside of the main road and having a pathway with a width of 12 feet to access their lands. While so, the second petitioner's brother Manickanathan sold his lands and purchased some other properties in some other village and hence, the second petitioner had no other go except to sell his property and also plan to purchase the lands in another village. The second petitioner sold his half share covered under sale deed dated 15.02.2013 to one P.V.Maheswar, S/o Visakan. The second petitioner's brother manickanathan had also sold his property to the said Maheswar. The first petitioner being the mother had entered into a sale agreement with the said Maheswar to sell 1/2 share of the petition mentioned property belonging to the minor and received a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- as advance and deposited the same in the name of the minor child in the Indian Overseas Bank, Velliyanai Branch for the period of 96 months ie., till the minor attains majority. The petitioners being the parents mutually decided to sell the petition mentioned property including the minor's share to the said Maheswar, for which, the permission of the Court is necessary. The minor child is under the care and custody of the petitioners. Hence, the above petition seeking permission.

5. The trial Court, as there is no respondent in the petition ordered notice by beat of tom tom and paper publication calling for objections. After compliance of the above directions, no objection came to be received and hence, the trial Court had proceeded with the enquiry. Originally, the first petitioner herein – mother of the minor has filed G.W.O.P., seeking permission and the learned trial Judge, upon considering the petition and evidence adduced, passed an order dated 30.11.2022 dismissing the permission petition. Challenging the dismissal order, the first petitioner preferred an appeal in C.M.A. (MD)No.876 of 2023 and this Court, vide order dated 05.10.2023, set aside the order dated 30.11.2022, passed by the learned Principal District Judge and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court for giving an opportunity to the appellant/petitioner to substitute minor's father and also directed to give opportunity to the appellant/petitioner to make suitable amendment, produce evidence and to decide the case on merits and in accordance with law.

6. In pursuance of the direction of this Court, the second petitioner got himself impleaded in the main G.W.O.P., and both parents have pro