IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA No. 80 of 2007()
1. SUHARABEEVI, W/O. ABDUL RAZAK,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. NIL
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN
Dated :13/06/2007
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.
-------------------------------------
M.F.A.(G&W)No.80 OF 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated 13th June, 2007
JUDGMENT
Koshy,J
.
Appellant filed an application under sections 7,9
and 10 of the Guardian & Wards Act for appointing herself as
guardian for encumbering the property of the minor as security
for getting a loan. It is her case that her husband is in
Quatar and she is doing rubber business. Now, she wants to
extend her business and hence a loan is required. It is
further submitted that she is getting rental income and her
husband is working in Quatar getting 1,500 Quatar Riyals and
Annexure C certificate was produced. According to the court
below the appellant and family are residing in the scheduled
property and there is no other landed property. It was not
proved that her husband has employment. The monthly
instalment to be paid towards loan will be Rs.6,000/= and
according to the court, from the income she will be unable to
pay the same. Therefore, in the interest of minor her
application cannot be allowed. It is now contended that the
court did not consider the fact that her husband was employed
in Quatar and she had other buildings on rent and getting
rental income of Rs.5,000/= per month. From the business she
is getting Rs.3,000/= per month. But, no evidence was adduced
MFA(G&W).80/2007 2
before the District Court. She could have filed a joint
application with her husband. That was not done. Her
husband was not made a party either as petitioner or as
respondent. But, husband filed a statement showing that he
has no objection to appoint her as guardian. However, her
contentions have to be proved. Evidence has to be adduced
to the satisfaction of the District Court to prove that
interest of the minor will not be prejudiced, appellant is
actually conducting the business and she is having
sufficient income from that, she is receiving the rental
income and correctness of the income of the husband etc.
Hence, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter so
that appellant can adduce evidence to satisfy the court the
necessity for appointing her as guardian of the minor and
interest of the minor will not be prejudiced by giving
property as security for obtaining the loan.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
K.P.BALACHANDRAN
JUDGE
tks