Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rameshwar Paul, originally a minor, filed a suit through his father as next friend seeking declaration that a sale deed executed by his mother, Kushavartabai, in favor of respondents No. 2 and 3 (Shivaji and others) was void and illegal. The suit land, admeasuring 2H 90R at Gut No. 254, Digras, was claimed to belong exclusively to the plaintiff. The mother had no title or interest, and the sale was allegedly obtained by undue influence, coercion, and without consideration. The mother acted as guardian when the father was alive, and no court permission was obtained for the sale. Initially, the suit sought declaration and perpetual injunction, but later amended to include possession after alleged forcible dispossession. Defendant No. 2 (Shivaji) contested, claiming a prior partition and that the sale was for legal necessity and benefit of the minor. The trial court decreed the suit, holding the plaintiff as exclusive owner and the sale void. The first appellate court reversed, dismissing the suit. The plaintiff filed this second appeal. The High Court framed substantial questions of law regarding the validity of the sale by the mother as de facto guardian without court permission. The court held that under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, a natural guardian (mother) cannot alienate minor's property without prior permission of the court. Any such alienation is voidable at the instance of the minor. The mother was not the natural guardian when the father was alive, and she acted as a de facto guardian without authority. The sale was not for legal necessity or benefit of the minor, as the alienee failed to prove. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the first appellate court's judgment, and restored the trial court's decree with costs.
Headnote
A) Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 8 - Sale of Minor's Property by De Facto Guardian - Void Ab Initio - Mother acting as de facto guardian sold minor's share without court permission - Held that such sale is void and not binding on the minor, as per Section 8(2) and (3) of the Act (Paras 10-12). B) Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 8 - Natural Guardian - Power to Alienate - Mother is natural guardian of minor son under Section 6, but she cannot alienate minor's property without prior permission of the court under Section 8(2) - Any alienation without such permission is voidable at the instance of the minor (Paras 10-12). C) Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 8 - Legal Necessity - Burden of Proof - The alienee must prove that the sale was for legal necessity or benefit of the minor - In absence of such proof, sale is not binding on the minor (Paras 13-14). D) Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 8 - De Facto Guardian - Mother acting as guardian when father alive - Mother cannot act as guardian when father is alive and capable - Sale by mother as de facto guardian without authority is void (Paras 10-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sale of a minor's share by his mother as de facto guardian without prior permission of the court is void and not binding on the minor.
Final Decision
Second Appeal allowed. Judgment and decree of the first appellate court set aside. Judgment and decree of the trial court restored. Respondents to pay costs.
Law Points
- Sale of minor's property by de facto guardian without court permission is void
- Section 8 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act
- 1956
- Natural guardian's power to alienate minor's property
- Burden of proof on alienee to show legal necessity and benefit to minor
