SARJUBHAI KANTILAL PATEL Vs. BHIKHUBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . The petitioner-plaintiff filed Special Civil Suit No. 248 of 1999 in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Surat for specific performance of the agreement wherein nine persons have been impleaded as defendants including the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 who are husband and wife and the defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are minor children of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. They are impleaded as defendant Nos. 3 and 4 through their natural guardian and next friend of their father No. 1.

(2.) . The defendants moved an application Exh. 24 before the trial Court with the prayer that the plaint may be rejected under the provisions of Order VII, Rule 11(d) of the Civil Procedure Code ("C.P.C." for short) for the breach of mandatory provisions of Order 32, Rule 3(4) of the C.P.C. The trial Court vide the impugned order dated 26-11-1999 allowed that application and the plaintiffs' suit was rejected on the ground thai no guardian has been appointed for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 by the Court. It is mandatory duty of the Court to appoint the guardian for proper representation of the minor in the suit. This order has been challenged in the present revision application in the revisional jurisdiction under Sec. 115 of the C.P.C.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record of this case.