BISHAN SWARUP CHOWDARY AND ANOTHER Vs. ALL CONCERNED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the Ist Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court Hyderabad, dismissing the petitioners' application for exempting them from the operation of Rule 13-A of the Rules under the Indian Succession Act, holding that there are no reasons for granting the exemption prayed for.

(2.) The petitioners have applied for the issuance of a succession certificate in their favour in respect of certain shares etc., owned and possessed by the deceased wife of the Ist petitioner, by name Smt. Urmilabai alias Urmiladevi who passed away intestate on 5-4-1967 leaving her husband and minor daughter, the petitioners. Pending that application, the present application was filed for exemption. The Court below, without assigning any reasons, dismissed the application. Hence this revision petition.

(3.) Sri Tata Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that a Hindu father is not entitled to apply under the Guardians and Wards Act for an order appointing him as guardian of the person or property of the minor because under Hindu law, the father is the lawful guardian of his child, and cited the decision of a Division Bench of Madras High Court in Sivasankara v. Radhabai, AIR 1939 Mad. 611 . The Ist petitioner, being the father and the natural guardian of the 2nd petitioner, is not entitled to apply under the Guardians and Wards Act for an order appointing him as guardian of the person and property of the 2nd petitioner. The Court below failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. In the circumstances, I hold that it is just and proper to grant the exemption as prayed for.