SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kumar Manoj vs Nil on 30 May, 2018

1

Date of Judgment:30.05.2018
M.F.A.No.100452/2015
Kumar Manoj and another
Vs.
Nil
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2018

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
AND
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE H. B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY

M.F.A. No. 100452 OF 2015 (GW/WC)

BETWEEN:

1. KUMAR MANOJ
S/O. NEMU VEERGOUD @ PATIL,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BASTWAD,
TQ: DIST: BELAGAVI.

2. KUMAR VARUN
S/O NEMU VEERGOUD @ PATIL,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BASTWAD, TQ: DIST: BELAGAVI

THE APPELLANTS BEING MINORS
THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
NATURAL MOTHER, GUARDIAN
LALITA W/O NEEMU VEERGOUDA
@ PATIL, AGE: 36 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2

Date of Judgment:30.05.2018
M.F.A.No.100452/2015
Kumar Manoj and another
Vs.
Nil
R/O: BASTWAD,
TQ: DIST: BELGAVI
… APPELLANTS

(BY MR. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR
MR. SHREEVATSA SURESH HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND

NIL
… RESPONDENT

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 47(1) OF
GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, 1890, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.10.2013 PASSED IN
G W.C. NO.6/2013, ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELGAUM,
DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 29
OF THE GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT, R/W SECTION
8(2) OF HINDU MINORITY AND GUARDIANSHIP ACT.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr. Shreevatsa Suresh Hegde, Advocate for appellants.

1. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits

that since the appellants minors Kumar Manoj S/o Nemu

Veergoud @ Patil and Kumar Varun S/o Nemu Veergoud @
3

Date of Judgment:30.05.2018
M.F.A.No.100452/2015
Kumar Manoj and another
Vs.

Nil
Patil, who were of 14 years age in the year 2013 at the time of

filing a case under Section 29 of the Guardians and Wards Act

R/w Section 8(2) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,

have now attained majority and therefore the present appeal has

become infructuous.

2. In view of the submission made by the learned

counsel for the appellants, the present appeal is dismissed as

infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

yan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation