- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Shantavva W/O Yellappa Halepeti, v. Nil
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6THDAY OF OCTOBER, 2015
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.100928/2015 (GW/WC)
Between:
1. Shantavva wife of Yellappa Halepeti, Age: 50 years, Occupation: Service, Residing at Ketheshwar Colony, Heggeri, Old Hubli, Hubballi-580024.
2. Yellappa son of Kamanna Halepeti, Age: 60 years, Occupation: Business, Residing at Ketheshwar Colony, Heggeri, Old Hubli, Hubballi-580024. … Appellants
(By Sri.Prakash Andanimath, Adv.) And:
Nil
… Respondent
This appeal is filed under Order 47(a) of Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, against the judgment and decree dated 11.08.2014 passed in G & W.C.No.2/2014, on the file of the I
: 2 :
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hubli, allowing the petition filed under Section 7 & Section 29(A) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
This appeal coming on for orders this day, Anand Byrareddy J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellants states that, he had filed a petition under Section 7 and Section 29(A) of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 seeking appointment of the present appellants as guardians of two minor children and also sought permission to alienate the property described in the schedule to the petition for the purported welfare of the said minors.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants would now state that the identity of the property itself was incorrectly mentioned in the petition, therefore, it would have to be corrected at the source and hence, seeks permission to withdraw the petition itself, filed before the Court below, with liberty to file a fresh petition.
3. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of granting liberty to the appellants to file a fresh petition, which shall be
: 3 :
considered on merits. It is noticed that the Court below had allowed the petition to sell the immovable property for whatever reasons. It is notice that it is prime urban property, which the appellant would never be able to acquire in future, and which the minor would lose forever. Therefore, the Court shall proceed with greater prudence in considering any fresh petition, that may be brought.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
MBS/-
Alert