Fatima Haron Sharma vs The State & Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 901 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         FAO No. 424/2013
%                                         18th February, 2014

FATIMA HARON SHARMA                                   ......Appellant
                 Through:                Mr. Ravi Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
                                         Rajat Joneja, Advocate.


                          VERSUS

THE STATE & ORS.                                          ...... Respondents
                          Through:       Ms. Megha Bharara, Adv. for Ms.
                                         Ruchi Sindhwani, Adv.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.    This is an appeal filed under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and

Guardianship Act, 1956 challenging the impugned judgment of the

Guardianship Court dated 27.7.2013 by which the Guardianship Court has

dismissed the petition of the appellant, petitioner before the Guardianship

Court, and who is the natural mother of the minor Ms. Tisha Razel Sharma.

The appellant has been denied permission to sell 25% undivided share of the

minor Ms. Tisha Razel Sharma in the property bearing no. D-58,

Panchseheel Enclave, New Delhi-110017.

FAO 424/2013                                                                 Page 1 of 4
 2.    The Guardianship Court notes that the appellant is not living in the

property bearing no.D-58, but at a flat in Gurgaon address of which is given

in the memo of parties, and that the appellant already has with her a sum of

Rs.1 crore lying in a fixed deposit. Because of these facts, the Guardianship

Court has observed that there is sufficient amount available to the appellant

to take care of the minor Ms. Tisha Razel Sharma.

3.    I note that the appellant had filed valuation report with respect to the

suit property as per which the 1/4th undivided share of the minor is valued at

Rs.82,85,525/-. Learned senior counsel for the appellant, on instructions

states that in fact on account of passage of time the minor's share as of today

would be higher than the amount stated in the valuation report and the

appellant on sale of the minor's share in the property bearing no.D-58, will

deposit a sum of Rs.1.5 crores in a fixed deposit in a Nationalized Bank as a

share of the minor.

4.    Learned senior counsel for the appellant, on instructions states that on

the appellant being given permission to sell 1/4th share in the property of D-

58, the appellant will not sell her share and that of the minor Tisha in the

property bearing no.A-10/2, DLF Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana till the minor

becomes at least 25 years in age, and if the Gurgaon property has to be sold,

the proceeds thereof will be utilized for purchase of another suitable
FAO 424/2013                                                                Page 2 of 4
 residential property so that minor always has a roof over her head. For

selling of this Gurgaon property, the appellant will approach the relevant

Guardianship Court at the time when there is a need so felt to sell the

Gurgaon property.

5.    In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and the appellant is

allowed to sell 1/4th share of the minor in the property D-58, Panchseheel

Enclave, New Delhi-110017.        The appellant will deposit an amount of

Rs.1.5 crores on the sale of the minor's share in the property D-58 directly in

the bank account of the minor Ms. Tisha Razel Sharma in a Nationalized

Bank. The appellant will also give an undertaking and a surety bond to the

Guardianship Court not to sell, transfer, alienate or part with the share of the

appellant as also the share of the minor in the Gurgaon property till Ms.

Tisha Razel Sharma is at least 25 years of age. In case, there is urgency or

pressing necessity to sell the shares of the appellant and minor in the

Gurgaon property then the appellant will approach the Guardianship Court at

such time, and on showing of the necessity and/or urgency, the Guardianship

Court will consider the application for selling of the Gurgaon property in

accordance with law.

6.    The amount which is deposited in a fixed deposit, on the sale of the

D-58 property in the name of the minor in a Nationalized Bank, will
FAO 424/2013                                                                 Page 3 of 4
 continue to remain in the Nationalized Bank till the minor Ms. Tisha Razel

Sharma attains majority, and till which stage only the interest from the fixed

deposit will be utilized for upkeep and expenses of the minor Ms. Tisha

Razel Sharma. In case, there is a need to withdraw a lumpsum amount from

the fixed deposit, on arising a pressing necessity or urgency, the appellant

can move the Guardianship Court at that stage for withdrawal of the whole

or part of the amount in lumpsum and which application when moved, will

be examined by the Guardianship Court in accordance with law for lumpsum

withdrawal of the amount in the fixed deposit.

7.    The appeal is therefore allowed and the appellant in terms of the

present judgment will now move before the Guardianship Court for filing of

the undertaking and surety bond in terms of the present judgment, and on the

Guardianship Court verifying the undertaking and surety bond to be in terms

of the present judgment, the appellant will be entitled to sell the 1/4 th share

of the minor in the property D-58 Panchseheel Enclave, New Delhi-110017.

Parties are left to bear their own costs.




FEBRUARY 18, 2014                             VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

ib