Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Incidentally. this particular problem does not arise in England. since the "law to which the minor may be subject" is superseded by the mandatory sta- tutory rule which regards the welfare of the child as paramount.

6.74. The question may be raised whether clause (a) is needed at all the present day. when persons below 18 years of age are prohibited from marrying by the Child Marriage Restraint Act. l929 as amended in 1978. If the present law relating to minimum age of marriage in India is complied with throughout India. there would not. in future. be any minor who is a female married in India.

"Section 5(3), Children Act, 1960, as amended in 1978' 'See discussion relating to section 19, supra and para 7.19, supra.

Section 27 Section 28.

Transfer of valuable, movable property.

Need for amendment of section 29 as to movable nropcrty.

that Court, except for the prescribed purposes. The leave may be 'general or special and may be defined by the order granting it. - ' M - ' The section needs no change.

7.24. Section 27 deals with the duties or the guardian of the property. Carrying out the principle laid down in se'cti6ti' 20 (fiduciary relationship). it provides that the guardian is bound todcal with the property of tlieiiward, as ('illici- fully as a man of ordinary prudence would deal with' 'it if it were his own, and subject to the provisions of this chapter, he may do. all acts which are reasonable and proper for the realisation, protection or benefit of the pijopcrty- Although there is abundant case law on the section, it is mostly concerned with the appli- cation of the section in the innumerable situations of infinite variety that present themselves in actual life No serious problems arising from the substance or form of the section have come to notice and we do not therefore recommend any change in the section. ' 7.25. Section 28 deals with the powers of the testamentary guardianiii res- pect of property. In brief, it provides that the power to alienate immovable property of the ward is subject to any restriction imposed by the will or other instrument under which he is appointed, unless he has been declared by the Court to be the guardian and the Court permits him by written order to dispose of any immovable property in a specified mannertnotwithstanding the restrictions imposed by the instrument. \' ' The section needs no change.

Though the suggestion pertained only to the Bombay Act, it was. on an examination of the subject in the Legislative Department, thought that since the Bengal Minors Act, 1858 was drawn on the same lines as the Bombay Act, the improvements suggested in the Bombay Act would be needed in that Act also. It was further pointed out that the European British Minors Act, 1874 had also created several anomalies. For example, its provisions were confined to "European" British subjects, and were inapplicable to Eurasians. ' 2 Some problems had arisen in Madras also. The minute of the Chief Justice of Madras? is oi interest in this context--

(1) Legislation on the subject of guardianship and custody (including, testamentary guardianship).

(2) Legislation relating to children.

(3) The law relating to inherent jurisdiction of the High Court in rela- tion to wardship.

(4) The law relating to habeas corpus, in so far as it deals with the recovery of custody of minors below the age of discretion.

Legislation on the subject. particularly the statutes passed during the last half a century or so, shows that mrch of the field has come to be regulated by the State. The "rights" of the parents have receded into the background, while the welfare of the child has come into the foreground. This stage has not, how- ever, been reached without consirlerrthle experimentation. Even now, the comp- lexity of the legislation relating to children and the frequency with which it has been subjected to amendment, rather shows that the final solution to the problem of securing the welfare of children is not within easy reach.