RAM SHANKAR Vs. SHYAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision against an order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Unnao in certain proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act. It appears that one Chandika died leaving two minor girls. The police came to the village and entrusted some property of the minors to one Ram Shankar, applicant. This property included a sum of Rs. 500/ -. After the property had been made over to Ram Shankar, applications were made by various persons including Smt. Shyama for appointment of a guardian of the minors. Ram Shankar, applicant was also one of those who claimed to be a guardian of the minors. He also made an application for his own appointment as a guardian of the minors. In the application which he made, he definitely mentioned that the minors and their property were in his care. The court, however, ultimately appointed Smt. Shyama as the guardian of the minors, after the appointment had been made, Smt. Shyama made an application to the court praying that Ram Shankar, who was in possession of the property of the minors may be ordered to make over the property to her. The property which was in the possession of Ram Shankar, included Rs. 500/- in cash, a pair of bullocks and a horse. Ram Shankar contested the application made by smt. Shyama for the delivery of the property on the grounds that he was in possession of Rs. 270/-only which had been accounted for and that the bullocks and the horse were no longer in his possession. The court made no order for the delivery of the horse and bullocks as they were not in the possession of Ram Shankar and directed Smt. Shyama to file a separate suit for the recovery of that property. It, however came to the conclusion that Ram Shankar had in his possession Rs. 500/- belonging to the minors out of which he had accounted for Rs. 270/- only and Rs. 230/- remained due by him to the minors and directed this amount to be paid by him to smt. Shyama. It is against this order that the applicant has come up in revision.

(2.) THE only point which has been urged on behalf of the applicant is that the learned Civil Judge had no jurisdiction under Section 41 (3) of the Guardians and Wards Act to direct the applicant to pay Rs. 230/- to Smt. Shyama as Ram Shankar was not a duly appointed guardian of the minors. Section 41 (3) of the Guardians and Wards Act reads as follows:

(3.) THE application in revision is dismissed with costs.