K.SABARINATHAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the father of Sri.S.Neeraj who was born mentally retarded (hereinafter referred to as "the special child"). Suprabha, the wife of the petitioner and the mother of the special child, expired on 8/1/1999. An extent of 3 acres of property belonged jointly to Suprabha, her brother and their mother (hereinafter referred to as, "wife", "brother-in-law" and "mother-in-law", respectively). After the death of the wife, in the year 2006 and 2008 the brother-in-law and mother-in-law executed registered sale deeds with respect to the property in favour of strangers. At that time the special child was a minor and the sale deeds were executed by the mother-in-law as his guardian. In the year 2009, the petitioners mother-in-law and brother-in-law filed a suit as OS 741/2009 before the Sub Court, Thrissur against the petitioner and the special child as defendants, seeking a relief for partition in respect of certain other item of property. Subsequently the petitioner, on his own behalf and as the guardian of the special child, who was then a minor, filed OS 1701/2012 for partition treating the sale deeds of 2006 and 2008 first above referred to as void.

(2.) Pending the suits the parties arrived at a settlement. As per the settlement, the petitioner did not claim any share in the property. The value of the share of the special child over the properties was fixed at Rs.10.00 lakhs. The sub court as per order on IA 5884/13 permitted the petitioner to sign the compromise for and on behalf of the special child. It appears that, the fact that the special child is mentally challenged was not brought to the notice of the Court. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the suit ended in a compromise. In compliance with the terms of the compromise, an amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs, being the share of the minor, was deposited in a Bank-HDFC Bank, Palakkad Town, R.S. Road as a Fixed Deposit. The Fixed Deposit receipt was produced before the court noting a lien in favour of the court. The same has been observed in the judgment passed on compromise in the suit OS 741/2009. A copy of the said judgment is produced along with the writ petition as Ext.P4.

(3.) In the year 2017, on the application of the petitioner under Sec. 14 of the National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999, (hereinafter referred to as "the National Trust Act") the petitioner was appointed as the legal guardian of the special child. Since neither at the time of execution of the sale deeds in the year 2006 and 2008 or at the time of the compromise before the Sub Court, Thrissur, in OS 741/09, any guardian in terms of the National Trust Act was appointed for the special child, petitioners seek for a direction from this Court to the respondent who is the Chairman of the local level committee under the National Trust Act for sanction to execute a conveyance in favour of the assignees under the 2006 and 2008 sale deeds for the consideration of Rs.10.00 lakhs received under the compromise in OS 741/09.