C.R. No.3535 of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C.R. No.3535 of 2008
Date of Decision: 7.7.2008
Smt.Kuldip Kaur .....Petitioner
Vs.
General Public ....Respondent
....
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
****
Present : Mr. Sanjive Peter, Advocate for the petitioner.
....
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)
The petitioner impugns an order dated 25.4.2008 passed by the
Guardian Judge, Jalandhar, dismissing an application, filed for extension of
time to sell the property of the minor.
The petitioner Kuldip Kaur, filed an application for permission
to sell the property of the minor. The Guardian Judge at Jalandhar, vide
order dated 19.11.2004 granted permission to sell the minor’s property,
subject to the following conditions :-
i) the property shall be sold within a period of six months
from today;
ii) that the money realized from the sale shall be utilized for
the upbringing and education and other expenses of the minor.
The petitioner, thereafter made an attempt to sell the property
but was unable to sell the property for want of an appropriate buyer. The
petitioner, therefore, approached the Guardian Judge at Jalandhar, for
C.R. No.3535 of 2008 2
extension of time to sell the property, in accordance with the order dated
19.11.2004. The Guardian Judge at Jalandhar, vide order dated 25.4.2008
dismissed the application, by holding that as there is no material on record
to prove that the applicant made any effort to sell the property during the
period in question and no auction of the property was ever announced, the
petitioner is required to prove the delay of each and every day before grant
of any permission. It was also held that as the property has not been sold
for four years and the minor is about to attain majority, there was no reason
to grant extension of time.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused and
impugned order and fail to comprehend the reasons assigned, for rejecting
the application. Mere delay in sale of the property would not disentitle the
petitioner to pray for extension of time. A finding recorded by the Court
below that no auction of the property was ever announced is
incomprehensible. The petitioner was granted permission to sell by private
sale and not by a public auction. Even otherwise, as there is no opposition
to the prayer for grant of extension of time or to the sale of the minor’s
property, the trial Court should have accepted the petitioner’s prayer for
extension of time.
Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated
25.4.2008 is set aside and the petitioner is granted three months’ time to sell
the property, in accordance with the order passed by the Guardian Judge on
19.11.2004.
The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.
7.7.2008 (RAJIVE BHALLA)
GS JUDGE
C.R. No.3535 of 2008 3