Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 83

7.13. Section 25-The competent Court.-

The first question concerns the Court having jurisdiction under the section. Although section 25 does not specifically lay down which is the competent Court, it seems to be the general policy of the Act to vest jurisdiction in a Court having jurisdiction in the place where the ward for the time being ordinarily resides.1 However, the question seems to have arisen in regard to section 25, and it has been held2-3 that whether the application is under section 9 (application for guardianship of the person or property) or under section 25 (application for restoration to custody), it is the district Court having Jurisdiction in the place where the minor ordinarily resides that would have jurisdiction.

We do not consider it necessary to recommend an amendment on this point.

1. See section 4(5)(b)(ii).

2. Chimanlal v. Rajaram, AIR 1937 Born 158 (159): 30 Born LR 44.

3. Moung Ba v. Ma Than, AIR 1929 Rang 129.

The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and Certain Provisions of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys