LAKSHMI DEVI Vs. CHANDRAKALA SARAOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against an order dated the 25th September, 1973, of the District Judge of Purnea, removing the appellant from guardianship of the person and property of Smita Agrawal, minor daughter of the late Alok Kumar Agrawal, and cancelling the order dated the 18th January, 1972, appointing the appellant as guardian.

(2.) On the 7th February, 1971, in a motor car accident, the father of the minor, Alok Kumar Agrawal, her mother Manju Agrawal, her younger brother Sribardhan Agrawal, her grand-father Krishinakumar Das, and her grand-mother, Raj Kumari Devi, died leaving Smita Agrawal, the sole survivor in the branch of Krishna Kumar Das. The appellant is the wife of Nirmal Kumar Das, brother of Krishna Kumar Das, who had separated from the latter during his life time. The minor, Smita Agrawal, escaped from the catastrophe, as she was living at Calcutta with the respondents, her maternal grand-mother (Nani) and maternal uncle (Mama), where she was prosecuting her studies in Modern High School.

(3.) After about 9 months of the aforesaid car accident, on the 18th November, 1971, the appellant, Lakshmi Devi, a grand-paternal-aunt of the minor, filed an application under Section 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act 1890 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the District Judge of Purnea, praying that she should be appointed guardian of the person and proerties of the minor. In that application she mentioned the name of her husband, Nirmal Kumar Das, her son Manoj Kumar Agrawal, and her minor daughter Madhulika, as the near relations of the minor, besides herself. Within three days of the Court's order for publication of notices of the case, on the 18th January, 1972, the three near relations, mentioned in the application, filed power and also an application staring that they had no objection to the appellant being appointed as guardian of the person and properties of the minor, provided the same is ordered without any prejudice and detriment to their right, title and interest, if any, in the properties, mentioned in the various schedules of the guardianship application in which the appellant's husband and son claimed interest. Thereupon, by an order of the same date, i.e., the 18th January, 1972, the learned District Judge appointed the appellant as the guardian of the person and properties of the said minor. On the 8th February, 1972, the appellant Lakshmi Devi furnished bond which was accepted by the Court on the 12th April 1972, and thereafter the guardianship certificate was issued on the 14th April, 1972. These facts are not in dispute.