V. JAYALAKSHMI v. B.S.BHASKAR
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA MFA No.587/2012 (G & WC) BETWEEN :
#1. V. JAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O K. SUNDARESHAN.
#2. K. SUNDARESHAN, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O LATE SUNDARAJ. BOTH ARE R/AT NO.89, "BRIGHTWAY LAYOUT" NEAR BRIGHTWAY SCHOOL, I CROSS, II MAIN, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE -560 061. (By SRI.K.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADV.,) ...APPELLANTS. AND: B.S.BHASKAR, S/O LATE G.SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.29, SRI SAPTAGIRI, 7TH CROSS, HMT LAYOUT, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 032. (By SRI.PARAMESHWARAPPA.C, ADV.) ...RESPONDENT. 2 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47 OF THE GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09.12.2011 PASSED IN G & W.C NO.244/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, AND THE LOWER COURT HAVING NO JURISDICTION TO TRY THE PROCEEDINGS FILED UNDER SECTION 29 OF G & W ACT. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, N.K.PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed challenging the order dated
09.12.2011 passed in G & W.C.No.244/2011 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, wherein the application filed by the appellants under Section 29 of the G & W Act has been rejected.
#2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondent. During the course of the arguments, they have filed a Joint Memo dated
15.06.2012 duly signed by the appellants and the respondent and their respective counsel. The Joint Memo dated 15.06.2012 reads as under: “The appellants, who are the guardians of the minor child Mr.Bhanu 3 Thej.B. have sought permission of this Hon'ble Court, to alienate the property mentioned in the affidavits filed by the appellants and the respondent in the above appeal. The appellants have undertaken to produce certified copy of the sale deed pursuant to which, the property in question would be alienated. They have also undertaken to deposit the sale consideration to be received by the minor child, would be deposited in a fixed deposit for period of five years in the name of the minor child. They have also undertaken to produce the copy of the FD receipt before this Hon'ble Court. The respondent who is the brother of the father of minor child has also filed an affidavit giving his consent for alienating the property in question. In view of the affidavits of the parties, the above appeal may kindly be disposed off by this Hon'ble Court permitting the parties to alienate the property in question. 4 The joint memo may kindly be taken on records, in the interest of justice and equity.” In the light of the statements made in the Joint Memo dated 15.06.2012, the appeal filed by the appellants is disposed off permitting the parties to alienate the property in question with the consent of the brother of the father of the minor child and the appellants respectively. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE AGV
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.