HARNAM SINGH Vs. KAMLA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision and has been directed against the order dated 9th June, 1970 of the District Judge, Dharamsala. Smt. Kamal Deyi being the mother and natural guardian of her minor sons, Karam Singh (13 years), Bir Singh (11 years)and Sukh Dev Singh (8 years), applied under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and guardianship Act before the District Judge, Kangra for permis- sion to sell a parcel of land situate at Khan-pur Chak Indora and belonging to the minors. It was stated that the said land is lying 'banjar' and has been adversely affected by river-action, so much so that no crops ever yielded out of it. There is a close vicinity of river beas and the process of dilluvion influences the land. As such, it was stated that the said land be permitted to be sold in the interest and welfare of the minors. The usual notice was issued but to the public at large and not to any specific person. No one eame to object and the learned District Judge, after examining two witnesses, arrived at the conclusion that it was evidently advantageous to the minors if the land is sold and the money invested in the improvement of their other land. Accordingly he granted the permission to sell the land, with one small direction that the sale-deed should be shown to the Court before it is finalised.

(2.) THIS order he made on 24-11-1969. Subsequently, it seems, one Harnam Singh appeared, who claimed to be the uncle of the minors. He made an application for review before the learned District Judge and asserted as he has done in this Court, that the minors already possessed other land yielding an income of Rs. 10,000/per annum and besides that, they also possessed cash certificates worth Rs. 25,000/ -. That being the position, there was hardly any necessity for effecting the sale of the disputed land. As such there was a danger of the property being squandered away by the natural guardian. Therefore, he asked for a review by the learned District Judge of his previous order. After hearing Harnam Singh, the learned District Judge, however, found that he had no power to review his own decision and on this short ground, the application of Harnam Singh has been dismissed on 9th June, 1970. It is against this second order of the learned District fudge that Harnam Singh has come up in revision.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contended with some insistence that the learned District Judge has failed to exercise a jurisdiction which was vested in him. According to the learned counsel, he could revise his previous order under inherent jurisdiction and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code was available for that end. According to the respondent, the Court had become functus officio and as such it was no longer open for it to have revised its previous order.