Mata Din vs Sheikh Ahmad Ali on 16 January, 1912
16. It is perfectly clear that under the Mahommedan law the mother is entitled only to the custody of the person of her minor child up to a certain age according to the sex of the child. But she is not the natural guardian ; the father alone, or, if he be dead, his executor (under the Sunni law) is the legal guardian. The mother has no larger powers to deal with her minor child's property than any outsider or non-relative who happens to have charge for the time being of the infannt The term "do fact) guardian" that has been applied to these persons is misleading: it connotes the idea that people in charge of a child arc by virtue of that fact invested with certain powers over the infant's property, This idea is quite erroneous ; and the judgment of the Board in Mata Din v. Ahmad Ali (1912) L.R 39 I.A. 49 : 14 Bom. L.R. clearly indicated it. There, an infant's share was sold by the elder brother, in whose charge the child was, along with his own share, to pay a joint ancestral debt. The vendee at the time of the sale was in possession cf the whole property under a mortgage executed by the ancestor. On attaining majority the younger brother, ignoring the sale, -brought a suit against the vendee-mortgagee for the redemption of his own share. The defence set up was that the sale by the infant's de facto guardian, made for a valid necessity, was binding on the infant. The Lower Courts decreed the plaintiff's claim ; on appeal to this Board the arguments proceeded on the same lines as in the present case, though in reverse order.