Dr. Sanjeevkumar S/O ... vs Laxmanrao S/O Lamimbajirao Pawar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2648 Kant

                                1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2021

                            PRESENT
           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
                               AND
           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL

                M.F.A. NO.200051/2014 (GW)

Between:

Dr. Sanjeevkumar
S/o Kashinath Karbahari
Aged about 40 years
Occ: Medical Practitioner
R/o Village Bet-Balkunda
Tq. Basavakalyan-585 401
                                                      ... Appellant

(By Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate)

And:

Laxmanrao S/o Limbajirao Pawar
Aged about 61 years
Occ: Pensioner & Advocacy
R/o Basweshwar Colony
Near Prakash Khandre's House
At Bhalki, Tq. Bhalki, Dist. Bidar-585 401
                                                    ... Respondent

(By Sri Sachin M. Mahajan, Advocate)

       This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 47(a)
of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, praying to allow the appeal
and set aside the order dated 31.07.2013 passed in G & WC.
No.2/2012 by the Senior Civil Judge at Basavakalyan and to pass
any other appropriate order.
                                 2



      This appeal    coming on for final hearing,         this day,
S.G.PANDIT J., delivered the following:


                          JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the appellant Dr. Sanjeevkumar

under Section 47(a) of the Guardian and Wards Act,

1890, assailing the order dated 31.07.2013 in G & WC.

No.2/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at

Basavakalyan, whereby the petition filed by the

appellant under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Guardian

and Wards Act R/w provisions of Hindu Minority and

Guardianship Act for the custody of minor boy

Prathviraj was dismissed.

2. Heard Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, learned

counsel for the appellant and Sri Sachin M. Mahajan,

learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for both the parties submit

that during the pendency of the appeal, with the

intervention of the elders and well wishers, the parties

have settled the issue involved in the appeal.

Accordingly, they have filed a joint memo dated

06.07.2021. The joint memo is singed by both the

appellant and respondent as well as their counsel. The

joint memo reads as follows:

"JOINT MEMO The appellant and respondent most humbly submit as under.

It is submitted that, the parties have settled the matter at the intervention of elders and well wishers and they have decided to file the present joint memo to record the understanding entered between the parties.

It is agreed between the parties that, the father of the ward (appellant herein) shall have visiting rights once in a fortnight preferably on Saturday or Sunday, where the ward shall be in the company of the father (appellants herein) at the residence of the appellant or any other convenient place from morning 6 till evening 6 and there shall not be

any interference by the grand-father of the ward (respondent herein) during those hours.

The appellant/father of the ward agrees and admits that, the ward has 1/18th share in the properties shown at Schedule A and B in O.S.No.41/2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Basavakalyan to which the ward is legally entitled. The grand-father of the ward (the respondent herein) agrees to the condition that, the name of the father of the ward will be reflected in the ROR as the guardian of the ward, till he attains the age of majority. The father of the ward hereby undertakes that he will not alienate the property of the ward under any circumstances. After the ward attains the age of majority, the father shall hereby grant to the ward his share in the above mentioned properties without any objections. The appellant and other co-plaintiffs in O.S.No.41/2012 shall withdraw R.F.A. No.200001/2014 in the light of compromise entered between the parties.

The father of the ward agrees to bear all the educational expenses till graduation or post graduation as the case may be.

The grandfather of the ward namely the respondent herein shall not create any further litigation on behalf of the ward in respect of subject matter of RFA No.200001/2014, against the appellant herein or against any of his family members.

The grandfather of the ward has further agreed that all the pending proceedings including with regard to arrears of maintenance payable to the ward will be withdrawn subject to payment of Rs.1,50,000/- (One lakh Fifty Thousand only) within the period of 45 days from today.

This joint memo is signed by the parties after fully understanding the contents."

4. On going through the joint memo, we are

satisfied that the terms and conditions of the joint

memo are in accordance with law and would be in the

interest of the minor boy. However, it is made clear that

if the appellant fails to part with the share of his son

Prathviraj after he attaining the age of majority, the son

of the appellant namely, Prathrivaj is at liberty to

execute the judgment and decree dated 08.10.2013 in

O.S.No.41/2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at

Basavakalyan.

With the above modification, the appeal is

disposed of in terms of the memo.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE LG