Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Order XXXII Rules 2 and 3 CPC - A mother who is a defendant can file an application for the appointment of a guardian for her minor or incapacitated child in a suit. The court can appoint a guardian to represent the minor or person of unsound mind during the proceedings, and such appointment continues throughout the suit, including appeals ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 70"], 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 2795].
Guardian Appointment in Suit - If a mother is a defendant and the minor is also a defendant, she can seek appointment as guardian for her child's interests during the suit, especially if the child is of unsound mind or incapacitated. The court has the authority to appoint a guardian on application, provided the minor or person of unsound mind is properly represented ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 70"], 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 2795].
Application for Guardian by Mother - The mother, as a defendant, can file an application under Order XXXII Rule 3 CPC for appointment of herself or another suitable person as guardian for her minor child or a person of unsound mind involved in the suit ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 70"], 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 2795].
Legal Provisions for Guardianship - Rules 1 to 14 of Order XXXII CPC apply to persons adjudged of unsound mind or not, including minors, and facilitate their representation through guardians during litigation ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 70"], 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 2795].
Implication in Partition and Suit Cases - In partition suits involving minors or persons of unsound mind, guardianship applications are common. Mothers, even if defendants, can initiate such applications to protect the rights and interests of their children or incapacitated persons involved in the suit ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 40646"], 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 855].
Analysis and Conclusion:A mother who is a defendant in a partition or other civil suit can file an application under Order XXXII Rule 3 CPC for her appointment as guardian of her minor or incapacitated child involved in the case. This allows her to legally represent and protect her child's interests during the proceedings. The court's authority to appoint guardians ensures that minors or persons of unsound mind are adequately represented, regardless of the mother's role as a defendant.
Partition suits often involve family members disputing property shares, and when minors are parties, additional legal safeguards come into play. A common question arises: In a , can a mother who is a defendant file an application for the appointment of a guardian for her minor children who are also defendants?
This issue touches on family law, property rights, and child welfare under Indian statutes. While courts generally allow such applications if procedural rules are followed and the minors' best interests are prioritized, specifics depend on the case. This post breaks down the legal framework, procedures, relevant laws, and insights from case precedents. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
A seeks to divide jointly owned property among co-owners, typically under the (CPC), and personal laws like the . When minors are defendants or plaintiffs, they cannot represent themselves due to lack of .
Courts must ensure minors' interests are protected. As seen in various cases, mothers or often step in. For instance, in property disputes involving ancestral land, plaintiffs sought partition claiming shares from a deceased mother, but defendants countered with sale deeds [
#PartitionSuit, #GuardianAdLitem, #FamilyLawIndia
On a plain reading of Order XXXII Rule 2 CPC, it provides that an order of appointment of a guardian for the suit may be obtained on application in the name and on behalf of the minor or by the plaintiff. ... Order XXXII Rule 3(2) of CPC provides that an order for the appointment of a guardian for the suit may be obtained upon application in the name a....
in the aforesaid suit. ... The party shall file self attested computer generated copy of this order It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioners are the defandant ... has not been decided and prays that the aforesaid injunction application be decided expeditiously.
Plaintiffs approached the trial court seeking partition of plaint B schedule property alleging that the property was originally owned by Janaki Amma, the mother of the plaintiffs and the defendant, and after her death on 06.12.2003, the same was devolved upon them. ... However, when the learned counsel for the defandant was asked to justify evidence to support his contention, he relied on the evidence of DW1 to DW3 in this regard. ... Final....
the suit with cost throughout. ... Liberty is given to the appellant to file a proper petition. ... APPELLANT/DEFANDANT Vs 1 RAMAIAH 2 MANIMEKALAI ... ... RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to stay the suit properties compe....
Application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was filed by the petitioner and respondents No.2 to 10, in which, the ground was raised that advalorem Court fees was required to be paid in the civil suit filed. The learned trial Court has by the impugned order rejected the application. ... It has been pleaded in the plaint filed by respondent No.1 that the sale-deed dated 23.8.2020, that executed in favor of the petitioner/defandant....
It is pertinent to mention that an application was filed for the appointment of the guardian, solely on account of plaintiff No.3-Dr.Sita Sharma, to be suffering from dementia and to be not in a position to file and pursue the suit, in order to protect her rights. ... Perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision reveals that Rules 1 to 14 of Order 32 CPC, with regard to the appointment o....
It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that earlier as well a suit was filed by the defandant-Ramkrishna Agnihotri vide RCS No.20-A/2004 which was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 12.05.2005. ... Assailing the said judgment and decree dated 12.05.2005, a First Appeal was preferred before this Court vide F.A.No.934/2005 and accordingly, it was prayed that till the disposal of F.A.No.934/2005, further proceedings of the suit#HL_END....
''B'' Schedule Property which is the subject matter of the suit in OS.No.11977/2010 on the file of The present petition is filed by the 1st defandant ... ''B'' Schedule property which is the subject matter of the suit as well as the appeal. ... in the suit in OS.No.11977/2010 seeking to vacate the injunction granted which was filed for declaration of title and for recovery of p style="p....
He further submits that the present applicant also stands deleted from the array of parties as defendant in the suit. He also submits that the present applicant is not the original defendant No.1 but an imposter claiming to be defandant No.1. ... This application has been filed by the original defendant No.1 in the suit seeking impleadment of the applicant and also dire....
Perusal of the case file shows that the petitioner is the main and contesting defendant in the suit for recovery of Rs.52,44,274/-. ... However, the said application was also declined by the trial Court. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner needs only one effective opportunity to cross examine the concerned witnesses. ... Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitione....
Of wheat per year, a residential house or a rent of Re.1/- per month and Rs. 10/- per month for other expenses would be sufficient for the maintenance of the plaintiff. D.W.1 Ramnath, the guardian and natural father of the defandant in suit, admitted that the plaintiff is entitled to maintenance. I have held that the plaintiff did not acquire any rights of ownerships over the suit property but where is entitled to maintenance out of by same.
2. Plaintiff is the petitioner and the defendants are the respondents herein. Plaintiff filed the suit for partition against the respondents, who are her mother, brother and sister.
Defandant Nos. 1 & 2 are brothers and Defendant No. 4 (Respondent No. 4 herein) is their mother. (b) When the case was fixed for service of the remaining Defendants, Defendant Nos. 1 & 4 filed an application for dismissing the suit of the Plaintiffs being not maintainable on the ground that after passing of the Punjab Pre-emption (Haryana Amendment) Act, 10 of 1995, (hereinafter referered to as "the Act") the right of pre-emption on the basis of co-sharership is not available....
Considering the evidence of the plaintiff as well as of the defendant on the question of adverse possession it must be held that the learned Trial Judge was fully justified in coming to the aforesaid conclusion and rejecting the plea of adverse possession of the defendant. The learned Trial Judge has relied upon the fact that the plaintiff continued to pay municipal taxes for the house properly which formerly belonged to Memon Habib Abdual Latif Muddia and which was thereafter taken by Sir Adm....
In a suit for partition by the son of the first wife of the deceased assesses, the business carried by the deceased assesses, viz., manufacturing of beedis which was being carried on by the widow and another person was directed to be carried on by the receivers appointed by the court before whom the suit for partition was pending. Soon after the son had filed a suit for partition, the widow also came to file a separate suit for partition of the same estate and made an application for....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
