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

Report No. 83

8.10. View of Shadi Lal C.J.-

In this connection, we would like to quote the observations of Shadi Lal C.J. in a Lahore case.1 The observations are as follows:-

"It is also conceded that these powers can be exercised when the guardianship of the property is determined by any of the causes specified in section 41(2). Why should be Court become functus officio, if the cause determining the guardianship is the death of the ward? Is there any reason for making this differentiation? Surely, the Court which has appointed the guardian and is acquainted with his dealings with the property is in a much better position than any other Court to settle various matters relating to his stewardship of the property.

This method of deciding disputes about the nature and the extent of the property and the liability of the guardian with respect to that property provides not only an efficacious but a cheap and expeditious remedy. There is no reason why the Court should be deprived of this jurisdiction when the guardianship is determined by the death of the ward."

1. Shiv Charan Lal v. Bhawani Shankar, AIR 1928 Lah 495 (496).



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