Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.16 seconds)Section 45 in The Guardians And Wards Act, 1890 [Entire Act]
Tekait Ajant Singh vs Sundar Mall on 12 June, 1912
In the companion volume on Chancery Forms by Daniell, there are two forms (1398 and 1401) which set out the terms of the application and the contents of the affidavit whereby the application must be supported. It is clear from the form of the affidavit that special grounds for the application must be made out. Substantially, the same procedure is followed in the Courts of the United States, This procedure should, in our opinion, be followed in our Courts, based as it is upon the elementary rule that no order adverse to a party litigant should be made by a Court of Justice till he has been apprised of the charges brought against him and has been allowed reasonable opportunity to show cause. As was observed by this Court in the case of Tekait Ajant Singh v. Sundar Mall 16 Ind. Cas. 567 : 17 C.W.N. 862, it is a rule of universal application, based on the plainest grounds of justice, equity and good conscience, that a judicial order, which may possibly affect or prejudice any party, should not be finally made, unless he has been afforded an opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the order for removal of the appellant from the office of guardian cannot be supported. The charges brought against him were of a grave character; if the view taken by the translator, on an examination of the accounts, is well-founded, there is good reason to apprehend that there has been serious mismanagement of the estate of the infant by the guardians, and their conduct may possibly amount to a criminal offence. It is obviously just that, in a case of this character, opportunity should be given to the appellant to explain the accounts filed by him and to justify his conduct.
Section 34 in The Guardians And Wards Act, 1890 [Entire Act]
1