RABINDRA NATH MUKHERJEE Vs. ABINASH CHANDRA CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred under Section 47 of Guardians and Wards Act by Rabindra Nath Mukherjee against an order made under Section 7 of that Act rejecting his prayer to be appointed guardian of the person and property of minor Gautam Chatterjee who is his daughter's son. The parents of the minor are alive. Father of the boy who was joined as opposite party in the petition and is Respondent in this Court opposed the prayer of the petitioner appellant.

(2.) The parties are governed by Dayabhag Hindu Law, and under that law undisputably father is the natural guardian of the person and property of minor son. That law still prevails under Section 12 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. Appellant's claim to be appointed guardian in preference to the father of the boy who by their personal law is the natural guardian of the person and property of the minor is based on the history of the boy's life who is now about 12 years old, being born in 1959.

(3.) It is the admitted case of both parties that soon after the boy was born, he was brought to the house of his maternal grandfather and was brought up there and has been living there. Reason for that transposition of locus of the child at his early age has not been clearly stated by the appellant either in his application or in his deposition. But he has stated that it was at a time when the child was only 1 1/2 months' old., and since then neither the father nor the mother of the boy has taken any interest in the affairs of the child. The boy was brought up as a son in the family of his maternal grandfather who was a teacher in a Primary School. He was educated in that School and having done well he has passed the preliminary stage and is now in a Higher Secondary School where he is a student of Class VIII.