) Sri.Vijaya Bhaskar vs ) Sri.D.Honnappa on 26 September, 2019
58) Section 6 makes it clear that, the natural
guardian of a Hindu minor in respect of the minor's
person, as well as minor's property in the case of a
boy or an unmarried girl is, father. Section
specifically excludes the minor's undivided interest
in joint family property. Section 12 states that,
where a minor has an undivided interest in joint
family property and the property is under the
management of an adult member of the family,
guardian shall not be appointed for the minor in
respect of such undivided interest. Hence, in this
case, admittedly, at the time of sale of Item No.2 of
suit schedule property, Plaintiff No.3 and 4 were
minors, they were under the care and custody of
their father-1st Defendant. Moreover, as observed
in Issue No.1, suit schedule properties are the joint
family properties, in which, Plaintiffs and
Defendants No.1 and 2 are having undivided
interest. Under the provisions of the Hindu Minority
and Guardianship Act, no guardian shall be
OS.NO: 8609/2006
57
appointed in respect of family properties, in which,
minors have undivided interest, since property is
under the management of Kartha. When matter
being stood thus, it can be held that, Kartha can
alienate the property for family necessity, in which,
minor has an undivided share. This view is further
substantiated by the legal dictum of Hon'ble High
Court of Karnataka in M.Haris Vs. Kum.Sindhu
and Another reported in 2011 (4) KCCR 3235,
wherein, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka was
pleased to hold that :