Gujarat High Court
Hansiben Wd/O. Jesungbhai ... vs Parbhabhai Chelabhai Kanbi on 11 August, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/947/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 947 of 2021
==========================================================
HANSIBEN WD/O. JESUNGBHAI JOITABHAI KANBI & 5 other(s)
Versus
PARBHABHAI CHELABHAI KANBI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 11/08/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. In this appeal under section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act
read with section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the
Code for short), the appellant has assailed the judgment and order
dated 21.06.2019 passed by the learned 2nd Additional District
Judge, Deesa, District: Banaskantha in Civil Misc. Application
No.39 of 2018 by which the application under section 29 of the
Guardians and Wards Act for permission to sell undivided share of
the minors appellants no.2 to 6 was rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel Mr. Ankit Bachani appearing for and behalf
of the appellant.
3. Mr. Ankit Bachani has submitted that the impugned judgement is
contrary to the settled position of law, facts and evidence on
record. He further submitted that the Court below could have
allowed the permission to sell subject to reasonable conditions so
as to protect the interest of the minor. Thus, in this context,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/947/2021 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
referring to section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act and ratio
laid down in the case of Sankhala (Mali) Kantaben Bharatbhai
vs. Rabari Panchalbhai, AIR 2020 SC 205, it was submitted by
learned counsel Mr. Ankit Bachani that no permission is required
to sell the undivided share of the minors in an agricultural land.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal
of the impugned judgement, this Court is of the considered view
that, the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Sankhala
(Mali) Kantaben Bharatbhai (supra), has categorically observed
that in the case of an undivided share of a minor in joint family
property, no permission of Court would be necessary. In the facts
of the present case, leave was sought by the mother of the minors
and father has already expired. The case is covered by the
judgement of the learned Single Judge as referred above and
therefore, without much discussion, the impugned judgment and
order dated 21.06.2019 passed by the learned 2 nd Additional
District Judge, Deesa, District: Banaskantha in Civil Misc.
Application No.39 of 2018 is quashed and set aside. The appellant
is permitted to sell the undivided share of minors appellants No.2
to 6 in the agricultural land.
5. With the aforesaid, the appeal is allowed.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
SUDHIR
