(1.) THIS Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order of dismissing the application for appointment of Guardian.
(2.) GRAND mother has filed an application in O.P.No. 25 of 2000 seeking appointment of Guardian of her grand daughter. The Additional District Judge, Nagrcoil on evaluation of pleading and evidence, dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the judgment, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is field.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that a daughter was born to the first respondent and the deceased who is the daughter of the appellant. The birth extract of the minor daughter was marked as Ex.P1 Ex.P.2 is the death certificate of her daughter. Ex.P.3 is the legal heir certificate. The petITioner has not disputed that the deceased was treated in various hospITals by the first respondent, husband. She has also admITted in the petITion that the deceased was living wITh the first respondent for two years before her death and was teated in the hospITal by him. There is no averment that the deceased was Ill-treated by the first respondent. During her life time, there was no quarrel between the spouses. The allegation that the first respondent remarried another lady by name Usha, Kerala puram is not proved by any documentary evidence. If the allegation was true, the appellant could have examined any one of the neighbours to prove remarriage. the appellant has also admITted in her cross examination that after the death of her daughter Jayanthakumari, she has not seen the minor child. During her cross examination she has also admITted that she does not know the age of her grand daughter and was only informed that the first respondent got remarried.